On 04/03/2021 14:59, Mark Wielaard wrote:
Hi Timm,
On Thu, 2021-03-04 at 14:44 +0100, Timm Bäder wrote:
any update on this? I see that SHT_LLVM_ADDRSIG is still not in upstream
glibc. Are you working on that, Navin?
As for the checks, I'm not sure we can do anything here since elfutils
can't know whether a symbol is rightfully marked as address-significant.
I tried to lookup some more information about SHT_LLVM_ADDRSIG, but
couldn't really find much. There is this comment about it from the
binutils maintainers:
https://www.sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23817#c1
Hm, that is unfortunate of course. I can't find a bug report about this
in llvm's bugzilla. I could try to get a discussion going there.
Are you opposed to work around this in elflint in the meantime?
E.g. ignore all sections starting with 'llvm_'?
diff --git a/src/elflint.c b/src/elflint.c
index 85cc7833..9a40045c 100644
--- a/src/elflint.c
+++ b/src/elflint.c
@@ -3766,6 +3766,9 @@ cannot get section header for section [%2zu] '%s':
%s\n"),
const char *scnname = elf_strptr (ebl->elf, shstrndx,
shdr->sh_name);
+ if (strncmp (scnname, ".llvm_", 6) == 0)
+ continue;
+
if (scnname == NULL)
ERROR (_("section [%2zu]: invalid name\n"), cnt);
else
(But I guess that belong after the NULL check)
Or does elflint use the any llvm_ section?
Asking because they only exist when compiling with clang of course and
elflint not handling (or ignoring) them causes the testsuite to fail.
- Timm
--
Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Michael O'Neill, Tom Savage, Eric
Shander
