http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12763
Summary: [PATCH] Incorrect error when .tbss starts outside
PT_LOAD segment
Product: binutils
Version: 2.20
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
AssignedTo: unassig...@sources.redhat.com
ReportedBy: mar...@mc.pp.se
It can happen that .tbss has a VMA which is after the last VMA of the PT_LOAD
segment it is in, for example due to alignment requirements. This will cause
ld to report an error "`.tbss' can't be allocated in segment". But the check
is actually bogus, because the VMA of .tbss is never used. As long as .tbss
firs in the PT_TLS segment, all is well.
There is already an exception in the macro ELF_SECTION_SIZE, which says that
the size of .tbss should not be considered when the segment is PT_LOAD. Well,
neither should the VMA. My suggested fix is the following, which leverages the
already implemented special handling for .tbss:
diff --git a/include/elf/internal.h b/include/elf/internal.h
index 9ea175c..0ce9385 100644
--- a/include/elf/internal.h
+++ b/include/elf/internal.h
@@ -316,6 +316,7 @@ struct elf_segment_map
/* SHF_ALLOC sections must have VMAs within the segment. Be
careful about segments right at the end of memory. */ \
&& ((sec_hdr->sh_flags & SHF_ALLOC) == 0 \
+ || ELF_SECTION_SIZE(sec_hdr,segment) == 0 \
|| (sec_hdr->sh_addr >= segment->p_vaddr
&& (sec_hdr->sh_addr - segment->p_vaddr \
+ ELF_SECTION_SIZE(sec_hdr, segment) <= segment->p_memsz))))
The rationale here is that if the section has zero size (either becase it's
actually empty, or because we are ignoring the size because it's .tbbs in
PT_LOAD), then the VMA does not matter, because the address space is empty
anyway.
The bug exists in both 2.20.1 and 2.21.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- 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
