[Bug binutils/30793] kvx_reassemble_bundle index 8 out of bounds

2023-09-01 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30793

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra  ---
Fixed with commit f1917fc63166

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


Issue 61873 in oss-fuzz: binutils:fuzz_as: Direct-leak in xmalloc

2023-09-01 Thread sheriffbot via monorail
Updates:
Labels: -restrict-view-commit

Comment #3 on issue 61873 by sheriffbot: binutils:fuzz_as: Direct-leak in 
xmalloc
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=61873#c3

This bug has been fixed. It has been opened to the public.

- Your friendly Sheriffbot

-- 
You received this message because:
  1. You were specifically CC'd on the issue

You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://bugs.chromium.org/hosting/settings

Reply to this email to add a comment.

[Bug binutils/30792] Rnglists section dump in readelf outputs one rangelist per CU

2023-09-01 Thread sevaa at sprynet dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30792

--- Comment #1 from Vsevolod Alekseyev  ---
Looked at the sources - readelf straight up doesn't support rnglists sections
with no offset tables (which GCC happily emits, or used to in some versions).
Instead, it hard codes the offset count to 1 and dumps the first rangelist.
That's way incorrect. Offset tables are a good idea in DWARFv5, but not a
requirement. This logic may cause bogus output and bogue error messages, too,
if a CU in the rnglists section contains *no* rangelists.

Even if that was fixed in the straightforward way (unless the offset tables are
present, scroll through the section top to bottom), there would be an
inconsistency between the way v4 ranges section is treated and the way v5
section is treated. The problem is that of overlapping rangelists.

Compilers do that. There is a rangelist in the section, pointed to by some
DW_AT_ranges attribute in some DIE. Then another DW_AT_ranges points at the
middle of the same rangelist. Logically, it makes sense - variable A is
initialized and stays until the end of the scope, a bit later B is initialized
and stays for the same scope - the area of visibility for B is a subset of that
for A. The The DWARF standard doesn't prohibit that and I've seen it in the
wild.

This creates a problem of design philosophy: do you dump that as one rangelist,
or as two? For practical debugging utility, you want two (or more), so that
rangelist offsets can be followed. For faithfully representing the section
contents, you want one, so that physically the same rangelist entry is not
dumped several times. And readelf tries to have it both ways - for v4 sections,
it treats overlapping rangelists as distinct (enumerates the rangelist offsets
from DIEs and follows those), for v5 sections it dumps the section contents
(incorrectly in case of no offset tables).

I'd take a stab at fixing this, but please tell me which approach to
enumeration is right. If consistency with past versions (i. e. the half-here,
half-there approach of right now) is right, tell me that too.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


[Bug ld/30813] Compilation Fails Due to the Use of Protected Symbols

2023-09-01 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30813

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |INVALID

--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu  ---
This is intentional since copy relocation doesn't work with protected data
in shared libraries. The executable uses the copy and the shared library uses
the original. They can be out of sync. You can avoid it by compiling
protected1a.c with -mno-direct-extern-access.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


[Bug binutils/30806] CPPFLAGS are missing for bfd/chew, syslex_wrap and sysinfo

2023-09-01 Thread sam at gentoo dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30806

Sam James  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |2.42

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


[Bug ld/30813] Compilation Fails Due to the Use of Protected Symbols

2023-09-01 Thread chenhaixiang3 at huawei dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30813

chenhaixiang (A)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||chenhaixiang3 at huawei dot com

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.