[Bug ld/21132] [hppa-linux] pie support doesn't work
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21132 --- Comment #11 from Alan Modra --- I suspect the reason is that when building shared libraries you'd only hit the code I'm patching if the symbol involved had been forced local, for instance, was hidden visibility. -- 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/20755] readelf: DWARF-5 support
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20755 --- Comment #2 from Jan Kratochvil --- [PATCH 3/6] DWARF-5 basic functionality https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2017-02/msg00138.html -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 --- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu --- Also fixed on binutils-2_27-branch. -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 --- Comment #4 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_27-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=749984dd040933589b2a4e954889c61da6301bef commit 749984dd040933589b2a4e954889c61da6301bef Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Feb 15 11:39:30 2017 -0800 i386: Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC "lea foo@GOT, %reg" is OK in PIC since it only loads the GOT offset into register, which can be used later with a GOT base register to get the value in the GOT entry. (cherry picked from commit 2a5684011edabf5804abb9e11253a9747587b284) bfd/ PR ld/21168 * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_relocate_section): Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC. ld/ PR ld/21168 * testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Run pr21168. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168a.c: New file. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168b.S: Likewise. -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |2.28 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- Fixed for 2.28. -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 --- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_28-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=531ecb8262358e5432556fc4a8374194406ff81b commit 531ecb8262358e5432556fc4a8374194406ff81b Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Feb 15 11:39:30 2017 -0800 i386: Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC "lea foo@GOT, %reg" is OK in PIC since it only loads the GOT offset into register, which can be used later with a GOT base register to get the value in the GOT entry. (cherry picked from commit 2a5684011edabf5804abb9e11253a9747587b284) bfd/ PR ld/21168 * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_relocate_section): Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC. ld/ PR ld/21168 * testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Run pr21168. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168a.c: New file. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168b.S: Likewise. -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=2a5684011edabf5804abb9e11253a9747587b284 commit 2a5684011edabf5804abb9e11253a9747587b284 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Feb 15 11:39:30 2017 -0800 i386: Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC "lea foo@GOT, %reg" is OK in PIC since it only loads the GOT offset into register, which can be used later with a GOT base register to get the value in the GOT entry. bfd/ PR ld/21168 * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_relocate_section): Allow "lea foo@GOT, %reg" in PIC. ld/ PR ld/21168 * testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Run pr21168. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168a.c: New file. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr21168b.S: Likewise. -- 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/21168] ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 Dopıng changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs at moronic dot technology -- 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/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #18 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=a5def14f1ca70e14d9433cb229c9369fa3051598 commit a5def14f1ca70e14d9433cb229c9369fa3051598 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Wed Feb 15 10:55:51 2017 -0800 Add a test for R_386_GOT32/R_386_GOT32X IFUNC reloc error bfd/ PR ld/20244 * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_relocate_section): Properly get IFUNC symbol name when reporting R_386_GOT32/R_386_GOT32X relocation error against local IFUNC symbol without a base register for PIC. ld/ PR ld/20244 * testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Run pr20244-4a, pr20244-4b and pr20244-4c. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr20244-4.s: New file. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr20244-4a.d: Likewise. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr20244-4b.d: Likewise. * testsuite/ld-i386/pr20244-4c.d: Likewise. -- 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 gas/21167] gas v2.28.51 does not include .rel[a] sections to groups
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21167 Rafael Ávila de Espíndola changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rafael.espindola at gmail 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
[Bug ld/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #17 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Dopıng from comment #16) > Created attachment 9831 [details] > Disassembly + relocation section of lxecg2e.o > > I’ve attached the complete disassembly and relocation section of lxecg2e.o. I opened: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/21168] New: ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21168 Bug ID: 21168 Summary: ld should allow "lea foo@GOT, %ecx" Product: binutils Version: 2.29 (HEAD) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: ld Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: hjl.tools at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Target: i386-elf [hjl@gnu-6 ]$ cat x.S .text .globl bar .type bar, @function bar: call__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax addl$_GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_, %eax lea foo@GOT, %ecx mov (%eax,%ecx,1), %eax ret .section .text.__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax,"axG",@progbits,__x86.get_pc_thunk.ax,comdat .globl __x86.get_pc_thunk.ax .hidden __x86.get_pc_thunk.ax .type __x86.get_pc_thunk.ax, @function __x86.get_pc_thunk.ax: movl(%esp), %eax ret .section.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits [hjl@gnu-6 ]$ make libx.so gcc -B./ -m32-c -o x.o x.S ./ld -melf_i386 -shared -o libx.so x.o ./ld: x.o: direct GOT relocation R_386_GOT32 against `foo' without base register can not be used when making a shared object ./ld: final link failed: Bad value Makefile:28: recipe for target 'libx.so' failed make: *** [libx.so] Error 1 [hjl@gnu-6 ]$ Here "lea foo@GOT, %ecx" is OK. -- 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/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #16 from Dopıng --- Created attachment 9831 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9831&action=edit Disassembly + relocation section of lxecg2e.o I’ve attached the complete disassembly and relocation section of lxecg2e.o. -- 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/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #15 from Dopıng --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #14) > What are insns after "lea"? af: 8d 15 00 00 00 00 lea0x0,%edx b1: R_386_GOT32 lxecerr b5: ff 31 pushl (%ecx) b7: 50 push %eax b8: ff 34 17pushl (%edi,%edx,1) bb: 56 push %esi bc: 8d b5 58 fe ff ff lea-0x1a8(%ebp),%esi c2: 56 push %esi c3: 8b df mov%edi,%ebx c5: e8 fc ff ff ff call c6 c6: R_386_PLT32 ldxnbeg ca: 8b 9d f8 fb ff ff mov-0x408(%ebp),%ebx d0: 83 c4 24add$0x24,%esp d3: 8b 43 14mov0x14(%ebx),%eax d6: 83 f8 01cmp$0x1,%eax d9: 0f 85 e9 02 00 00 jne3c8 df: 8d 85 2c ff ff ff lea-0xd4(%ebp),%eax e5: 50 push %eax e6: 8b df mov%edi,%ebx e8: e8 fc ff ff ff call e9 e9: R_386_PLT32 _setjmp ed: 8b 9d f8 fb ff ff mov-0x408(%ebp),%ebx f3: 83 c4 04add$0x4,%esp f6: 85 c0 test %eax,%eax f8: 0f 85 d4 00 00 00 jne1d2 fe: e8 00 00 00 00 call 103 103: 5e pop%esi 104: 8d 45 d4lea-0x2c(%ebp),%eax 107: 50 push %eax 108: ff 73 10pushl 0x10(%ebx) [...] -- 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 gas/21167] gas v2.28.51 does not include .rel[a] sections to groups
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21167 georgerim at gmail dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||georgerim at gmail 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
[Bug gas/21167] New: gas v2.28.51 does not include .rel[a] sections to groups
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21167 Bug ID: 21167 Summary: gas v2.28.51 does not include .rel[a] sections to groups Product: binutils Version: 2.29 (HEAD) Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gas Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: georgerim at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Assume next code (1.s): .section .text,"axG",@progbits,foo,comdat .quad bar ./as-new 1.s -o out readelf -a out [ 5] .text PROGBITS 0048 0008 AXG 0 0 1 [ 6] .rela.textRELA 0120 0018 0018 I 7 5 8 As shown, .rela.text is present for .text, it has 5 as sh_info field, but gas does not include it into group: COMDAT group section [1] `.group' [foo] contains 1 sections: [Index]Name [5] .text During the "regular" part of the link, the linker includes or discards groups as a unit. ELF spec that says: "There may *not* be non-symbol references to the sections comprising a group from outside the group, for example, use of a group member's section header index in an sh_link or sh_info member." So it looks to be violation of spec. -- 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/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Dopıng from comment #13) > My assembler knowledge is rusty, that much is certain... > a0: 66 89 85 38 fc ff ffmov%ax,-0x3c8(%ebp) > a7: 8d 85 2c ff ff ff lea-0xd4(%ebp),%eax > ad: 8b 0a mov(%edx),%ecx > af: 8d 15 00 00 00 00 lea0x0,%edx b1: R_386_GOT32 lxecerr > [...] > What are insns after "lea"? -- 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/21149] readelf - several invalid read
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21149 Thuan Pham changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Thuan Pham --- Thanks Nick. The bug has been resolved. -- 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/21132] [hppa-linux] pie support doesn't work
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21132 --- Comment #10 from John David Anglin --- The patch fixes the trivial test case. We are down to the following ld failures on trunk: Running /home/dave/gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/indirect.exp ... FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 1 FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 2 FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 3 FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 4 FAIL: Run with libpr18720c.so 5 Running /home/dave/gnu/binutils/src/ld/testsuite/ld-elf/shared.exp ... FAIL: Run pr18718 FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (1) FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIE (2) FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (1) FAIL: Run pr18718 with PIC (2) I'll take a look at these. I'm somewhat surprised that this problem didn't affect shared libraries as the fix seems to apply to them as well. Still wondering why pie executables are being placed in second quadrant of VM. -- 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/20244] ld fails to handle "op $imm, bar@GOT"
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20244 --- Comment #13 from Dopıng --- My assembler knowledge is rusty, that much is certain... Excerpts from the output of “objdump -dwr lxecg2e.o”: 0010 : 10: 66 90 xchg %ax,%ax 12: 53 push %ebx 13: 8b dc mov%esp,%ebx 15: 83 e4 f0and$0xfff0,%esp 18: 55 push %ebp 19: 55 push %ebp 1a: 8b 6b 04mov0x4(%ebx),%ebp 1d: 89 6c 24 04 mov%ebp,0x4(%esp) 21: 8b ec mov%esp,%ebp 23: 81 ec 08 04 00 00 sub$0x408,%esp 29: 89 9d f8 fb ff ff mov%ebx,-0x408(%ebp) 2f: 89 7d f8mov%edi,-0x8(%ebp) 32: e8 00 00 00 00 call 37 37: 5f pop%edi 38: 8d bf 03 00 00 00 lea0x3(%edi),%edi 3a: R_386_GOTPC _GLOBAL_OFFSET_TABLE_ 3e: 8b 53 08mov0x8(%ebx),%edx 41: 89 75 fcmov%esi,-0x4(%ebp) 44: 8d 75 e0lea-0x20(%ebp),%esi 47: 89 75 f4mov%esi,-0xc(%ebp) 4a: 0f b7 42 30 movzwl 0x30(%edx),%eax 4e: 85 c0 test %eax,%eax 50: 8b 8f 00 00 00 00 mov0x0(%edi),%ecx 52: R_386_GOT32 lxetbn 56: 8b 0c 81mov(%ecx,%eax,4),%ecx 59: 89 4d f0mov%ecx,-0x10(%ebp) 5c: 75 19 jne77 [...] 76: c3 ret 77: 8b 43 18mov0x18(%ebx),%eax 7a: 8d b5 08 fc ff ff lea-0x3f8(%ebp),%esi 80: 68 1c 02 00 00 push $0x21c 85: 52 push %edx 86: 56 push %esi 87: c7 00 ff ff ff ff movl $0x,(%eax) 8d: 8b df mov%edi,%ebx 8f: e8 fc ff ff ff call 90 90: R_386_PLT32 _intel_fast_memcpy 94: 8b 9d f8 fb ff ff mov-0x408(%ebp),%ebx 9a: 8b 53 1cmov0x1c(%ebx),%edx 9d: 33 c0 xor%eax,%eax 9f: 52 push %edx a0: 66 89 85 38 fc ff ffmov%ax,-0x3c8(%ebp) a7: 8d 85 2c ff ff ff lea-0xd4(%ebp),%eax ad: 8b 0a mov(%edx),%ecx af: 8d 15 00 00 00 00 lea0x0,%edx b1: R_386_GOT32 lxecerr [...] That last line is the only reference to ‘lxecerr’. If the JNE at 5c only jumps in case of an error condition, the remaining code may never get executed. But that’s quite a lot of code up to 8b4 (including six setjmp() calls, but no longjmp() call, so this code doesn’t smell like an error handler IMHO). “ar x libnls12.a ; objdump -dwr *.o | egrep 'lea.*R_386_GOT32' | wc -l” prints 439. Does that grep make sense or would I need to grep for something else? How would the correct lea instruction look like? -- 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/21111] gold unhandled mips64 relocation types R_MIPS_HIGHER / R_MIPS_HIGHEST
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 Cary Coutant changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #2 from Cary Coutant --- Fixed on 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 gold/21111] gold unhandled mips64 relocation types R_MIPS_HIGHER / R_MIPS_HIGHEST
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Cary Coutant : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=e242ece1e890b66d226b38b489a7edd79b3656d5 commit e242ece1e890b66d226b38b489a7edd79b3656d5 Author: Vladimir Radosavljevic Date: Wed Feb 15 00:47:36 2017 -0800 Add support for R_MIPS_HIGHER/HIGHEST, R_MICROMIPS_HIGHER/HIGHEST relocations. 2017-02-15 Vladimir Radosavljevic PR gold/2 * mips.cc (Mips_relocate_functions::relhigher): New method. (Mips_relocate_functions::relhighest): Likewise. (mips_get_size_for_reloc): Add support for relocs: R_MIPS_HIGHER and R_MIPS_HIGHEST. (Target_mips::Scan::local): Add support for relocs: R_MIPS_HIGHER, R_MIPS_HIGHEST, R_MICROMIPS_HIGHER and R_MICROMIPS_HIGHEST. (Target_mips::Scan::global): Likewise. (Target_mips::Scan::get_reference_flags): Likewise. (Target_mips::Relocate::relocate): Call static methods for resolving HIGHER and HIGHEST relocations. -- 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/21132] [hppa-linux] pie support doesn't work
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21132 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |amodra at gmail dot com --- Comment #9 from Alan Modra --- Created attachment 9830 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9830&action=edit Allocate plt plabel relocs when pic I think this simple patch should cure the problem. Please test on hardware. -- 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
