[Bug gold/15758] Gold segfault when using -q option
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15758 Cary Coutant changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|ian at airs dot com|ccoutant at google dot com --- Comment #1 from Cary Coutant --- I'll take a look. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gold/15758] New: Gold segfault when using -q option
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15758
Bug ID: 15758
Summary: Gold segfault when using -q option
Product: binutils
Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: gold
Assignee: ian at airs dot com
Reporter: law at redhat dot com
CC: ccoutant at google dot com
gold is segfaulting when linking the following testcode.
t.c (compile with -fPIC):
__thread int a;
void _start(void) {
a = 2;
}
Starting program: /tmp/binutils/gold/ld-new t.o -q
Breakpoint 3, gold::Sized_relobj_file<64, false>::emit_relocs_scan
(this=0xa644f0, symtab=0x7fff7980, layout=0x7fff7be0,
plocal_syms=0x77ffb468 "", p=...) at
/home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/reloc.cc:550
550 gold_assert(rr != NULL);
(gdb) c
Continuing.
Breakpoint 3, gold::Sized_relobj_file<64, false>::emit_relocs_scan
(this=0xa644f0, symtab=0x7fff7980, layout=0x7fff7be0,
plocal_syms=0x77ffb468 "", p=...) at
/home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/reloc.cc:550
550 gold_assert(rr != NULL);
(gdb) bt
#0 gold::Sized_relobj_file<64, false>::emit_relocs_scan (this=0xa644f0,
symtab=0x7fff7980, layout=0x7fff7be0, plocal_syms=0x77ffb468 "",
p=...) at /home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/reloc.cc:550
#1 0x006c5d68 in gold::Sized_relobj_file<64, false>::do_scan_relocs
(this=0xa644f0, symtab=0x7fff7980, layout=0x7fff7be0, rd=0xa4a770)
at /home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/reloc.cc:469
#2 0x006c2c7a in gold::Relobj::scan_relocs (this=0xa644f0,
symtab=0x7fff7980, layout=0x7fff7be0, rd=0xa4a770)
at /home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/object.h:1057
#3 0x006c27c1 in gold::Scan_relocs::run (this=0xa69020) at
/home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/reloc.cc:188
#4 0x0073e38b in gold::Workqueue::find_and_run_task
(this=0x7fff7630, thread_number=0) at
/home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/workqueue.cc:319
#5 0x0073e9b4 in gold::Workqueue::process (this=0x7fff7630,
thread_number=0) at /home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/workqueue.cc:495
#6 0x00404016 in main (argc=3, argv=0x7fffdb68) at
/home/law/UPSTREAM/binutils/gold/main.cc:252
(gdb) p rr
$5 = (gold::Relocatable_relocs *) 0x0
It appears the relocatable_relocs are set up in:
gold::Sized_relobj_file
for (std::vector::const_iterator p = reloc_sections.begin();
p != reloc_sections.end();
++p)
[ ... ]
Output_section* data_section = out_sections[data_shndx];
if (data_section == reinterpret_cast(2))
{
// The layout for the data section was deferred, so we need
// to defer the relocation section, too.
const char* name = pnames + shdr.get_sh_name();
this->deferred_layout_relocs_.push_back(
Deferred_layout(i, name, pshdr, 0, elfcpp::SHT_NULL));
out_sections[i] = reinterpret_cast(2);
out_section_offsets[i] = invalid_address;
continue;
}
if (data_section == NULL)
{
out_sections[i] = NULL;
out_section_offsets[i] = invalid_address;
continue;
}
Relocatable_relocs* rr = new Relocatable_relocs();
this->set_relocatable_relocs(i, rr);
We have no appropriate out_section for the section reloc section. Thus
data_section is NULL and we call this->set_relocatable_relocs, ultimately
leading to the assertion failure.
I'm not at all familiar with the gold code, so I'm not sure how to proceed at
the moment. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: Assumption about size of bfd_vma in opcodes/arm-dis.c
Mathias Svensson writes: > In multiple places in opcodes/arm-dis.c there is an implcit assumption > that bfd_vma has the same size as an int. See for example lines > 2014-2033 in HEAD. You are looking at some one year old sources, this has already been fixed in 2012-07, in response to PR binutils/13135. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: Assumption about size of bfd_vma in opcodes/arm-dis.c
Hi Mathias, In multiple places in opcodes/arm-dis.c there is an implcit assumption that bfd_vma has the same size as an int. See for example lines 2014-2033 in HEAD. This can cause a segfault e.g. if binutils is compiled on i386 with --enable-64-bit-bfd --target=arm-linux. I am confused - how does this assumption cause a seg-fault ? In the places where your patch changes bfd_vma to int, the value is being passed to print_addres_func(), which expects a bfd_vma parameter. so I fail to see why there is a problem. Cheers Nick ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/15745] erroneous warning from readelf
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15745 --- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- CVSROOT:/cvs/src Module name:src Changes by:ni...@sourceware.org2013-07-19 10:44:01 Modified files: binutils : ChangeLog readelf.c Log message: PR binutils/15745 * readelf.c (get_unwind_section_word): Whilst searching for a reloc section associated with an unwind section, check the type as well as the section number. Patches: http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.2025&r2=1.2026 http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/binutils/readelf.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.605&r2=1.606 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/15745] erroneous warning from readelf
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15745 Dmitry Botcharnikov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Dmitry Botcharnikov --- We faced with this issue running readelf on libc.so.6 for the ARM platform. I don't think that it can be reproduced with small test case. Nevertheless patch works, and we hope it will be commited in main trunk. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/15745] erroneous warning from readelf
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15745 Slava Garbuzov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||v.garbuzov at samsung dot com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
