[Bug binutils/10924] Bug in objdump when disassembling raw armv4t binaries
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2009-12-11 17:48 --- Subject: Re: Bug in objdump when disassembling raw armv4t binaries On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 05:25:25PM -, chris at seberino dot org wrote: > I don't think the following is UNPREDICTABLE. Every load and store that has > Rd == Rn isn't UNPREDICTABLE. That only applies if the W and P bits are set. > Or, if it is one of the "t" variants like strt. > > 2fc:004000bfstrheq r0, [r0], #-15 ; My copy of the manual doesn't say this is unpredictable - but it doesn't say what it means, either. The valid versions all have P == 1 and/or W == 1. And the post-indexed encoding is the same as strht encoding. I'm not quite sure what that adds up to! -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10924 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/10302] ld merging smaller strings into larger strings?
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2009-06-19 21:13 --- Subject: Re: New: ld merging smaller strings into larger strings? On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 08:59:39PM -, ianw at vmware dot com wrote: > I'm quite unsure why the final def is merged out? The documentation suggests > the merging will be done at the level of a null terminated string [1]; if > this > is not so maybe it could be made more clear? This is deliberate; without doing pointer arithmetic, it's impossible to distinguish the read only string "def\0" from "abcdef\0"+3, so the linker saves space in your binary. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10302 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/3191] Dwarf 2 reader in linker doesn't suppor DW_FORM_ref_addr
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-09-08 23:31 --- I've checked in a version of HJ's patch. But I can't work out what the problem is in this long bug report, so I'm not sure if it's fixed now. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3191 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/6761] abbrev_offset in DWARF2 info is set incorrectly (zero) by ld
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-07-25 16:00 --- Subject: Re: abbrev_offset in DWARF2 info is set incorrectly (zero) by ld On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 03:12:17PM -, nickc at redhat dot com wrote: > The problem with GDB has two parts. Firstly the code in > dwarf2read.c:read_partial_die that processes the DW_AT_sibiling attribute does > not check to see if the offset is valid. This is what eventually leads to the > seg-fault. The second problem is much bigger - GDB is not processing the > relocs > in the object file before attempting to interpret the debug sections and this > is > why it is having problems. Current versions do this and have for a long time; search for symfile_relocate_debug_section. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6761 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/6468] ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-04-29 20:51 --- Subject: Re: ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 08:46:30PM -, jreiser at BitWagon dot com wrote: > is the software itself, but I could find no indication of objections > by non-VxWorks targets. I saw just 16 matches to a search for >"--force-dynamic" [_with_ quotation marks: try not to ignore punctuation] > and none had any discussion about non-VxWorks targets, or including or > excluding the ability to force a Dynamic section. It may have been an internal discussion with Richard, sorry. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6468 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/6468] ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-04-29 19:48 --- Subject: Re: ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 06:54:37PM -, jreiser at BitWagon dot com wrote: > [Did I cover everything that should be changd? ;-)] Well, you'd also need a PT_INTERP. Probably more. > What was the specific objection to --force-dynamic on non-VxWorks? I don't remember, but I'm sure you can find it in the list archives. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6468 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/6468] ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2008-04-29 18:14 --- Subject: Re: New: ld: --export-dynamic fails if no undefined symbols On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 05:59:42PM -, jreiser at BitWagon dot com wrote: > If there are no undefined symbols then there is no Dynamic section, no > DT_SYMTAB, and no DT_HASH/DT_GNU_HASH; and --export-dynamic fails silently. > So > there is no way to have a module (ET_EXEC or ET_DYN) that has no undefined > symbols, yet exports some of its own symbols for use by other modules. I don't think this is true for ET_DYN. Have you tested that? It's not related to undefined symbols; it's caused by not linking an ET_EXEC against any shared libraries. This is solved by the --force-dynamic option in the VxWorks port of ld. The feature was not desired for other targets so the option is restricted to VxWorks. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6468 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/5207] man page of ld: hashstyle=both missing
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2007-11-07 22:29 --- Subject: Re: man page of ld: hashstyle=both missing On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 09:06:27PM -, mohringarmin at hotmail dot de wrote: > I have binutils version 2.18 installed. > Version of man pages is 2.67. The binutils man page comes from binutils, not from the man-pages package. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5207 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/5038] Error: Unrecognized token 'mod'
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2007-09-17 16:42 --- Subject: Re: Error: Unrecognized token 'mod' On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 08:04:04PM -, hjl at lucon dot org wrote: > mod is a special token for % in Intel mode, similar to AND, OR, XOR, NOT, Does this mean you can't call a function named mod? -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5038 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/4928] Linker should check code sequence before TLS optimization
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2007-08-16 13:19 --- Subject: Re: Linker should check code sequence before TLS optimization On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:08:34PM -, hjl at lucon dot org wrote: > 1. Those sequences may not be optimal in all cases. If compiler knows Then discuss ABI changes, please. ABI documents are not optional to follow! -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4928 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/4538] static initialization ignored in static archive (.a)
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2007-05-23 12:20 --- Subject: Re: static initialization ignored in static archive (.a) On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 07:20:04AM -, ejt at andrew dot cmu dot edu wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the archive format is intended to speed up > linking and simplify > distribution, *not change the behavior of code which results*. If the linker > can strip/leave out unused > code from an archive, that's a nice optimization, but if this causes a change > in runtime results, then > obviously that code wasn't unused after all, and was incorrect to leave it > out! You are incorrect. The standard does not cover archive libraries, and so the definition of "container" you're assuming has no basis in the standard. I'm positive there are people relying on the current behavior. Changing it would be a bad idea. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4538 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/2467] "ar q" gives quadratic memory use
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2006-03-17 03:18 --- Subject: Re: "ar q" gives quadratic memory use On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 12:46:53AM -, dcoutts at gentoo dot org wrote: > This problem with ranlib/ar memory consumption is made worse by the fact that > we > have to use xargs and invoke ar multiple times if we have a large number of > archive members. This is of course because of restrictions on the size of > command line arguments. When using "... | xargs ar q libfoo.a" we end up > re-generating the symbol index multiple times (eg about 10 for the ghc > libHSbase.a case). If ar supported -input then this would be better. Recent versions support @file for this situation. I don't know if this was in the last release - I don't think so. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2467 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/2362] SH: Hidden symbol in DSO does not be forced local
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2006-02-24 14:28 --- Subject: Re: New: SH: Hidden symbol in DSO does not be forced local On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 01:08:46AM -, sugioka at itonet dot co dot jp wrote: > On sh4-unknown-linux target, hidden symbol in DSO does not be kept local > if the symbol appeared at global section in the version script. > The hidden function is accessed directly at compile time, but global function > in DSO should be accessed through PLT, as the result, segmentation fault > occurs > on execution time. I'm pretty sure your test is invalid. If the compiler is told a symbol is hidden, it can't be forced global later without risking wrong code. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2362 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/2143] Unresolvable reference by DSO to hidden symbol despite --allow-shlib-undefined
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2006-01-18 14:52 --- Subject: Re: New: Unresolvable reference by DSO to hidden symbol despite --allow-shlib-undefined On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 11:40:56AM -, jan dot echternach at group-technologies dot com wrote: > I'm getting a "hidden symbol is referenced by DSO" error if I link a program > with both LSB2's libc.so and an old libnotes.so from Lotus Domino 6. > libnotes.so has an undefined reference to atexit, LSB2's libc.so has no > definition of that symbol, but there is a hidden atexit symbol in > libc_nonshared.a. > > I tried both the preinstalled ld (GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2.2 20041220 (SuSE > Linux)) and the ld from binutils-2.16.91.0.5 (GNU ld version 2.16.91.0.5 > 20051219). > > I can reproduce the error without libnotes.so by linking with a dummy DSO > that > has only an undefined 'atexit' reference. It is possible to work around the > problem by removing the hidden atexit symbol from libc_nonshared.a. Another workaround should be providing a non-hidden definition of atexit. In other cases this error is valuable; perhaps it should be conditioned on --allow-shlib-undefined. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2143 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/1343] need --with-lib-path = $exec_prefix for ld
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-09-14 15:38 --- Subject: Re: New: need --with-lib-path = $exec_prefix for ld On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 03:29:45PM -, russfink at hotmail dot com wrote: > I compiled a binutils for a custom target, and specified "./configure > --prefix=foo --exec_prefix=arch/foo" at the top level binutils directory. > During the build, it went into the "ld" directory and did a standard > "./configure". The option is --exec-prefix, not --exec_prefix. > This can be done easily because ld's configure has a --with-lib-path option - > but the toplevel binutils does not have any matching option nor does it > propagate any such thing down. The toplevel configure script propogates unknown --with options to all subdirectories. Have you tried using --with-lib-path? -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1343 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/1312] LD outputting huge files.
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-09-12 18:44 --- Subject: Re: LD outputting huge files. On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 06:08:59PM -, TheMoken at gmail dot com wrote: > >From looking at the dump, it appears that I need to add a .rodata section to > >the > linker script? Probably. If you've got an allocated section at 0, then objcopy has no choice but to base the binary image at 0. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1312 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/1040] Many packages fail to compile with binutils 2.16.1 because of ldscripts screwup
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-07-01 13:44 --- Subject: Re: New: Many packages fail to compile with binutils 2.16.1 because of ldscripts screwup On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 04:40:07AM -, funtoos at yahoo dot com wrote: > With binutils 2.16.1, lots of packages fail with wierd linker errors like some > library required by another library not found and then it dies with 'undefined > references'. All this happens because scripts in ldscripts/ only have > /usr/i386-sun-solaris2.11/lib in the SEARCH_DIR. ld doesn't see libraries > lying > in /lib and /usr/lib. Changing these scripts to include /lib and /usr/lib > solves > these problems. I couldn't figure out why -L/lib -L/usr/lib was not > honoured(in > hindsight I think may be I needed to use -R/lib -R/usr/lib). (Not -R, but -rpath-link.) How did you configure and build binutils? It should have done this automatically. > GCC build triplet: i386-sun-solaris2.11 ... huh. Is that right? Last I heard there was only 2.10. -- http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1040 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/993] fail to link if address of libc function taken in n64
--- Additional Comments From drow at false dot org 2005-06-07 03:33 --- Subject: Re: New: fail to link if address of libc function taken in n64 On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 10:00:41PM -, shay_gal-on at pmc-sierra dot com wrote: > Fails with "assertion fail" when trying to link after compiling with -mabi=64. > Works fine with o32 or n32. Same issue with taking address of malloc etc... > Can take address of non-glibc functions just fine. > > I have not verified with later incarnations of binutils yet. Please do - n64 support for MIPS/Linux did not really work until 2.15, and now 2.16 has been released. -- http://sources.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=993 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
