[Bug binutils/25181] RISC-V: Linker relaxation may fail if there are R_RISCV_ALIGN type relocations

2019-11-11 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25181 --- Comment #6 from Jim Wilson --- You can create a patch with git diff and then attach it to the bug report. It needs to be mailed to the binutils list if it gets checked in, but you can always ask someone else to do that for you. Contribut

[Bug binutils/25181] RISC-V: Linker relaxation may fail if there are R_RISCV_ALIGN type relocations

2019-11-11 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25181 --- Comment #5 from Jim Wilson --- Created attachment 12071 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12071&action=edit untested patch to fix _bfd_riscv_relax_call -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list

[Bug binutils/25181] RISC-V: Linker relaxation may fail if there are R_RISCV_ALIGN type relocations

2019-11-11 Thread wilson at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25181 Jim Wilson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug binutils/25180] Slowness in cplus_demangle()

2019-11-11 Thread tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25180 --- Comment #4 from Tim Rühsen --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #3) > The cause of the problem is basically due to the recursive nature of name > mangling, and there is nothing that can be done about this. But there is a > built-in

[Bug binutils/25180] Slowness in cplus_demangle()

2019-11-11 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25180 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug binutils/25180] Slowness in cplus_demangle()

2019-11-11 Thread tim.ruehsen at gmx dot de
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25180 --- Comment #2 from Tim Rühsen --- Hi Nick, no mystery. But a possible DoS vector and in the end just an example that demangling may take longer as expected (and possibly necessary). Smaller and 'real-world' input may have the same issue jus

[Bug binutils/25180] Slowness in cplus_demangle()

2019-11-11 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25180 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nickc at redhat dot com --- Comment #1