[Bug binutils/17154] x86 plt_sym_val fails to select proper plt entry
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17154 --- Comment #8 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "gdb and binutils". The branch, gdb-7.8-branch has been updated via bfeda6dc272717f4ea0cc3cc76e88fe243a79b01 (commit) via 5840bf271c87c3fc14739173fdc91c6a14057130 (commit) from 89d63ded9e8b3c10bab8a85cd8dbb271f0559945 (commit) Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those revisions in full, below. - Log - https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=bfeda6dc272717f4ea0cc3cc76e88fe243a79b01 commit bfeda6dc272717f4ea0cc3cc76e88fe243a79b01 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Jul 16 11:15:56 2014 -0700 Match PLT entry only for ELFOSABI_GNU input * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_plt_sym_val): Match PLT entry only for ELFOSABI_GNU input. * elf64-x86-64.c (elf_x86_64_plt_sym_val): Likewise. (elf_x86_64_plt_sym_val_offset_plt_bnd): Likewise. https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=5840bf271c87c3fc14739173fdc91c6a14057130 commit 5840bf271c87c3fc14739173fdc91c6a14057130 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Jul 16 08:16:24 2014 -0700 Properly match PLT entry against .got.plt relocation Relocations against .got.plt section may not be in the same order as entries in PLT section. It is incorrect to assume that the Ith reloction index against .got.plt section always maps to the (I + 1)th entry in PLT section. This patch matches the .got.plt relocation offset/index in PLT entry against the index in .got.plt relocation table. It only checks R_*_JUMP_SLOT and R_*_IRELATIVE relocations. It ignores R_*_TLS_DESC and R_*_TLSDESC relocations since they have different PLT entries. bfd/ PR binutils/17154 * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_plt_sym_val): Only match R_*_JUMP_SLOT and R_*_IRELATIVE relocation offset with PLT entry. * elf64-x86-64.c (elf_x86_64_plt_sym_val): Likewise. (elf_x86_64_plt_sym_val_offset_plt_bnd): New. (elf_x86_64_get_synthetic_symtab): Use it. ld/testsuite/ PR binutils/17154 * ld-ifunc/pr17154-i386.d: New file. * ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86-64.d: Likewise. * ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86.s: Likewise. * ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.d: Likewise. * ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.s: Likewise. * ld-x86-64/mpx.exp: Run bnd-ifunc-2. * ld-x86-64/tlsdesc-nacl.pd: Updated. * ld-x86-64/tlsdesc.pd: Likewise. --- Summary of changes: bfd/ChangeLog | 16 + bfd/elf32-i386.c | 42 -- bfd/elf64-x86-64.c | 97 +--- ld/testsuite/ChangeLog | 12 ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-i386.d | 47 +++ ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86-64.d | 46 +++ ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86.s| 28 + ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.d | 54 ++ ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.s | 28 + ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/mpx.exp |1 + ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/tlsdesc-nacl.pd |4 +- ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/tlsdesc.pd |3 +- 12 files changed, 359 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) create mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-i386.d create mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86-64.d create mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr17154-x86.s create mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.d create mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/bnd-ifunc-2.s -- 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/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Alan Modra --- Fixed -- 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/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 --- Comment #8 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing the project "gdb and binutils". The branch, master has been updated via b794fc1d1c3a3dfb65b74a36fe96c474fee65000 (commit) from 774bb79e9b9e192bcecc38da919edffaf9b5d236 (commit) Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those revisions in full, below. - Log - https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=b794fc1d1c3a3dfb65b74a36fe96c474fee65000 commit b794fc1d1c3a3dfb65b74a36fe96c474fee65000 Author: Alan Modra Date: Mon Jul 28 22:18:25 2014 +0930 Warn for ar/nm/ranlib/ld on lto objects without plugin PR 13227 bfd/ * archive.c (_bfd_compute_and_write_armap): Warn on adding __gnu_lto_slim to armap. * linker.c (_bfd_generic_link_add_one_symbol): Warn on adding __gnu_lto_slim to linker hash table. binutils/ * nm.c (filter_symbols): Warn on __gnu_lto_slim. --- Summary of changes: bfd/ChangeLog |8 bfd/archive.c |4 bfd/linker.c |8 +++- binutils/ChangeLog |5 + binutils/nm.c |4 5 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) -- 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/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|amodra at gmail dot com| Assignee|unassigned at sources dot redhat.c |amodra at gmail dot com |om | -- 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 ld/13557] Undef. ref. err. when linking with slim LTO obj. in static lib. (mingw32 target)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13557 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #10 from Alan Modra --- I think coff_link_check_archive_element is just plain broken. It really has no business reading symbols from the archive element to check against undefined symbols in the linker hash table. That already has been done by _bfd_generic_link_add_archive_symbols when the armap symbols are checked against undefined symbols.. For lto objects, checking the symbols again of course checks the wrong symbols, because the lto symbols are not available until after the plugin has claimed the archive element! -- 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/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 --- Comment #7 from hubicka at ucw dot cz --- > So is it sufficient (and safe) to warn just on the presence of __gnu_slim_lto? Yes, when __gnu_slim_lto gets into linking/archiving/nm, I think it is safe to warn about missing plugin. Honza -- 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/13227] GCC now produce slim LTO files. Those can't be linked/archived or nm w/o plugin used. It would be useful to output diagnostics when user attempts so
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13227 --- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #5) > So is it sufficient (and safe) to warn just on the presence of > __gnu_slim_lto? Yes, I think so. -- 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
