[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a load segment when static linking an executable

2018-07-18 Thread sourceware at wdtz dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428

Will Dietz  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sourceware at wdtz dot org

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a code-only load segment

2018-07-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org   |hjl.tools at gmail dot 
com
   Target Milestone|--- |2.32
Summary|ld does not put program |ld does not put program
   |headers in a load segment   |headers in a code-only load
   |when static linking an  |segment
   |executable  |

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a load segment when static linking an executable

2018-07-18 Thread bugdal at aerifal dot cx
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428

Rich Felker  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bugdal at aerifal dot cx

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23428] New: ld does not put program headers in a load segment when static linking an executable

2018-07-18 Thread nszabolcs at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428

Bug ID: 23428
   Summary: ld does not put program headers in a load segment when
static linking an executable
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.31
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ld
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: nszabolcs at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

simple static linking with is broken with 2.31 ld because it does not put
program headers into a load section unless there is some other read only
loaded section.

$ ld --version
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.31.1.20180718
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) a later version.
This program has absolutely no warranty.
$ cat t.s
.globl _start
_start:
xor %rdi,%rdi
mov $0xe7,%eax
syscall
$ as -o t.o t.s
$ ld -static t.o
$ readelf -aW a.out
ELF Header:
  Magic:   7f 45 4c 46 02 01 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 
  Class: ELF64
  Data:  2's complement, little endian
  Version:   1 (current)
  OS/ABI:UNIX - System V
  ABI Version:   0
  Type:  EXEC (Executable file)
  Machine:   Advanced Micro Devices X86-64
  Version:   0x1
  Entry point address:   0x401000
  Start of program headers:  64 (bytes into file)
  Start of section headers:  4320 (bytes into file)
  Flags: 0x0
  Size of this header:   64 (bytes)
  Size of program headers:   56 (bytes)
  Number of program headers: 1
  Size of section headers:   64 (bytes)
  Number of section headers: 5
  Section header string table index: 4

Section Headers:
  [Nr] Name  TypeAddress  OffSize   ES Flg
Lk Inf Al
  [ 0]   NULL 00 00 00 
0   0  0
  [ 1] .text PROGBITS00401000 001000 0a 00  AX 
0   0  1
  [ 2] .symtab   SYMTAB   001010 90 18 
3   2  8
  [ 3] .strtab   STRTAB   0010a0 19 00 
0   0  1
  [ 4] .shstrtab STRTAB   0010b9 21 00 
0   0  1
Key to Flags:
  W (write), A (alloc), X (execute), M (merge), S (strings), I (info),
  L (link order), O (extra OS processing required), G (group), T (TLS),
  C (compressed), x (unknown), o (OS specific), E (exclude),
  l (large), p (processor specific)

There are no section groups in this file.

Program Headers:
  Type   Offset   VirtAddr   PhysAddr   FileSiz  MemSiz
  Flg Align
  LOAD   0x001000 0x00401000 0x00401000 0x0a
0x0a R E 0x1000

 Section to Segment mapping:
  Segment Sections...
   00 .text 

There is no dynamic section in this file.

There are no relocations in this file.

The decoding of unwind sections for machine type Advanced Micro Devices X86-64
is not currently supported.

Symbol table '.symtab' contains 6 entries:
   Num:Value  Size TypeBind   Vis  Ndx Name
 0:  0 NOTYPE  LOCAL  DEFAULT  UND 
 1: 00401000 0 SECTION LOCAL  DEFAULT1 
 2: 00401000 0 NOTYPE  GLOBAL DEFAULT1 _start
 3: 00402000 0 NOTYPE  GLOBAL DEFAULT1 __bss_start
 4: 00402000 0 NOTYPE  GLOBAL DEFAULT1 _edata
 5: 00402000 0 NOTYPE  GLOBAL DEFAULT1 _end

No version information found in this file.
$ ./a.out
$


Note that the program headers (starting at 0x40 + 64) are not in a load
segment, so if the executable tries to access it (based on the program header
address the kernel passed in auxv) then it will be a runtime fault.
(reading program headers is e.g. needed to support tls in static executables)

if i add a readonly note section then program headers are correctly loaded:

$ ld --build-id -static t.o
$ readelf -lW a.out

Elf file type is EXEC (Executable file)
Entry point 0x401000
There are 3 program headers, starting at offset 64

Program Headers:
  Type   Offset   VirtAddr   PhysAddr   FileSiz  MemSiz
  Flg Align
  LOAD   0x00 0x0040 0x0040 0x00010c
0x00010c R   0x1000
  LOAD   0x001000 0x00401000 0x00401000 0x0a
0x0a R E 0x1000
  NOTE   0xe8 0x004000e8 0x004000e8 0x24
0x24 R   0x4

 Section to Segment mapping:
  Segment Sections...
   00 .note.gnu.build-id 
   01 .text 
   02 .note.gnu.build-id 
$


with a 2.30 ld, the 

[Bug binutils/23261] objcopy doesn't convert REL to RELA relocations when converting from i386 to x86-64.

2018-07-18 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23261

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||amodra at gmail dot com
   Severity|normal  |enhancement

--- Comment #1 from Alan Modra  ---
I doubt that this feature will ever be implemented.  It isn't so easy to
translate relocations from one target to another.

-- 
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


[Bug binutils/23261] objcopy doesn't convert REL to RELA relocations when converting from i386 to x86-64.

2018-07-18 Thread s at pahtak dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23261

--- Comment #2 from Stephen Checkoway  ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #1)
> I doubt that this feature will ever be implemented.  It isn't so easy to
> translate relocations from one target to another.

I believe the i386 to x86-64 translation is already happening. The bug is in
not turning REL into RELA. I.e., turning an implicit addend into an explicit
one.

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23428] ld does not put program headers in a load segment when static linking an executable

2018-07-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23428

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
   Last reconfirmed||2018-07-19
 CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu  ---
pr23428 branch:

https://github.com/hjl-tools/simple-linux/tree/pr23428

has a small run-time testcase:

[hjl@gnu-tools-1 simple-linux]$ make
gcc -g -O0 -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables   -c -o test.o test.c
gcc -g   -c -o start.o start.S
gcc -g   -c -o syscall.o syscall.S
ld -z separate-code -o test test.o start.o syscall.o
./test; echo $?
/bin/sh: line 1: 16441 Segmentation fault  (core dumped) ./test
139
[hjl@gnu-tools-1 simple-linux]$ gcc test.o
[hjl@gnu-tools-1 simple-linux]$ ./a.out 
[hjl@gnu-tools-1 simple-linux]$ echo $?
0
[hjl@gnu-tools-1 simple-linux]$

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23425] New: unresolved symbol diagnostic ends up calling find_abstract_instance with relocations applied causing spurious 'DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref'

2018-07-18 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23425

Bug ID: 23425
   Summary: unresolved symbol diagnostic ends up calling
find_abstract_instance with relocations applied
causing spurious 'DWARF error: invalid abstract
instance DIE ref'
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.30
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ld
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

Backtrace from the 2.31 branch:

#0  _bfd_error_handler (
fmt=0x690150 "DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref")
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/bfd.c:1177
#1  0x004c6214 in find_abstract_instance (unit=0x7056d8, 
orig_info_ptr=0x76df90 "\004> ", attr_ptr=0x7fffcd10, pname=0x770f18, 
is_linkage=0x770f14, filename_ptr=0x770f00, linenumber_ptr=0x770f0c)
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/dwarf2.c:2843
#2  0x004c6cbe in scan_unit_for_symbols (unit=0x7056d8)
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/dwarf2.c:3169
#3  0x004c789f in comp_unit_find_nearest_line (unit=0x7056d8, 
addr=4198435, filename_ptr=0x7fffd018, function_ptr=0x7fffce70, 
linenumber_ptr=0x7fffd00c, discriminator_ptr=0x0, stash=0x7054a0)
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/dwarf2.c:3616
#4  0x004c9975 in _bfd_dwarf2_find_nearest_line (abfd=0x6fe880, 
symbols=0x705270, symbol=0x0, section=0x700dd0, offset=35, 
filename_ptr=0x7fffd018, functionname_ptr=0x7fffd010, 
linenumber_ptr=0x7fffd00c, discriminator_ptr=0x0, 
debug_sections=0x68f9a0 , addr_size=4, 
pinfo=0x700090) at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/dwarf2.c:4807
#5  0x00491807 in _bfd_elf_find_nearest_line (abfd=0x6fe880, 
symbols=0x705270, section=0x700dd0, offset=35, 
filename_ptr=0x7fffd018, functionname_ptr=0x7fffd010, 
line_ptr=0x7fffd00c, discriminator_ptr=0x0)
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/elf.c:8752
#6  0x0042574f in vfinfo (fp=0x77bd2080 <_IO_2_1_stderr_>, 
fmt=0x555b18 ": undefined reference to `%pT'\n", ap=0x7fffd208, 
is_warning=1) at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/ld/ldmisc.c:350
#7  0x0042643f in einfo (
fmt=0x555b10 "%X%P: %C: undefined reference to `%pT'\n")
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/ld/ldmisc.c:626
#8  0x0041fd50 in undefined_symbol (info=0x6ced80 , 
name=0x70506c "_ZNSsC1Ev", abfd=0x6fe880, section=0x700dd0, address=35, 
error=1) at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/ld/ldmain.c:1346
#9  0x0046ad3d in elf_x86_64_relocate_section (output_bfd=0x6e7210, 
info=0x6ced80 , input_bfd=0x6fe880, input_section=0x700dd0, 
contents=0x701f60 "UH\211", , 
relocs=0x7050f8, local_syms=0x6f32b0, local_sections=0x76dd60)
at /space/rguenther/src/binutils-gdb/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c:2483

The code says it only handles refs within the same file but the guard
for this, a zero die_ref, doesn't work after applying relocations to
.debug_info and this function ends up being called from the unresolved
symbol diagnostic causing a spurious DWARF error to be reported.

  /* We only support DW_FORM_ref_addr within the same file, so
 any relocations should be resolved already.  Check this by
 testing for a zero die_ref;  There can't be a valid reference
 to the header of a .debug_info section.
 DW_FORM_ref_addr is an offset relative to .debug_info.
 Normally when using the GNU linker this is accomplished by
 emitting a symbolic reference to a label, because .debug_info
 sections are linked at zero.  When there are multiple section
 groups containing .debug_info, as there might be in a
 relocatable object file, it would be reasonable to assume that
 a symbolic reference to a label in any .debug_info section
 might be used.  Since we lay out multiple .debug_info
 sections at non-zero VMAs (see place_sections), and read
 them contiguously into stash->info_ptr_memory, that means
 the reference is relative to stash->info_ptr_memory.  */
  size_t total;

  info_ptr = unit->stash->info_ptr_memory;
  info_ptr_end = unit->stash->info_ptr_end;
  total = info_ptr_end - info_ptr;
  if (!die_ref || die_ref >= total)
{
  _bfd_error_handler
(_("DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref"));
  bfd_set_error (bfd_error_bad_value);
  return FALSE;

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23425] unresolved symbol diagnostic ends up calling find_abstract_instance with relocations applied causing spurious 'DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref'

2018-07-18 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23425

--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener  ---
A similar issue seems to happen with .debug_str lookups:

/usr/bin/x86_64-linux-gnu-ld: Dwarf Error: Offset (1678049557) greater than or
equal to .debug_str size (5846).
...
later undefined reference diagnostic

but I do not have a testcase to verify that.

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23425] unresolved symbol diagnostic ends up calling find_abstract_instance with relocations applied causing spurious 'DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref'

2018-07-18 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23425

--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener  ---
Created attachment 11143
  --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11143=edit
testcase

To reproduce do

> ./ld-new -o a.out ccELcIbzdebugobjtem cccLlhS9debugobjtem 
> ccqD9BbN.ltrans0.ltrans.o
./ld-new: warning: cannot find entry symbol _start; defaulting to
00401000
./ld-new: ./ld-new: DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref
ccqD9BbN.ltrans0.ltrans.o: in function `strerrno(int)':
:(.text+0x23): undefined reference to `std::basic_string, std::allocator >::basic_string()'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x3b): undefined reference to `strerrno_s(char*,
unsigned long, int)'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x55): undefined reference to
`std::string::operator=(char const*)'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x68): undefined reference to
`std::string::operator+=(char const*)'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x7d): undefined reference to
`std::string::operator=(char const*)'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x8e): undefined reference to
`std::basic_string, std::allocator
>::~basic_string()'
./ld-new: :(.text+0x99): undefined reference to `_Unwind_Resume'
./ld-new: ccqD9BbN.ltrans0.ltrans.o:(.eh_frame+0x4b): undefined reference to
`__gcc_personality_v0'

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23425] unresolved symbol diagnostic ends up calling find_abstract_instance with relocations applied causing spurious 'DWARF error: invalid abstract instance DIE ref'

2018-07-18 Thread jg at jguk dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23425

Jon Grant  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jg at jguk dot org

-- 
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


[Bug gas/23418] Incorrect xmmword is accepted

2018-07-18 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23418

--- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org  ---
The binutils-2_31-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu
:

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=01683b308a016c49418aee27241389bd2560e0f1

commit 01683b308a016c49418aee27241389bd2560e0f1
Author: H.J. Lu 
Date:   Wed Jul 18 12:34:44 2018 -0700

x86: Split vcvtps2{,u}qq and vcvttps2{,u}qq

After

commit 1b54b8d7e4fc8055f9220a5287e8a94d8a65a88d
Author: Jan Beulich 
Date:   Mon Dec 18 09:36:14 2017 +0100

x86: fold RegXMM/RegYMM/RegZMM into RegSIMD

... qualified by their respective sizes, allowing to drop FirstXmm0 at
the same time.

folded RegXMM, RegYMM and RegZMM into RegSIMD, it's no longer impossible
to distinguish if Xmmword can represent a memory reference when operand
specification contains SIMD register. For example, template operands
specification like these

RegXMM|...|Xmmword|...

and

RegXMM|...

The Xmmword bitfield is always set by RegXMM which is represented by
"RegSIMD|Xmmword".  This patch splits each of vcvtps2qq, vcvtps2uqq,
vcvttps2qq and vcvttps2uqq into 2 templates: one template only has
RegXMM source operand and the other only has mempry source operand.

gas/

PR gas/23418
* testsuite/gas/i386/xmmword.s: Add tests for vcvtps2qq,
vcvtps2uqq, vcvttps2qq and vcvttps2uqq.
* testsuite/gas/i386/xmmword.l: Updated.

opcodes/

PR gas/23418
* i386-opc.h (Byte): Update comments.
(Word): Likewise.
(Dword): Likewise.
(Fword): Likewise.
(Qword): Likewise.
(Tbyte): Likewise.
(Xmmword): Likewise.
(Ymmword): Likewise.
(Zmmword): Likewise.
* i386-opc.tbl: Split vcvtps2qq, vcvtps2uqq, vcvttps2qq and
vcvttps2uqq.
* i386-tbl.h: Regenerated.

(cherry picked from commit 11a322db5c8bc23009e97af30180d6b14d86dbd3)

-- 
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


[Bug gas/23418] Incorrect xmmword is accepted

2018-07-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23418

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED
   Target Milestone|--- |2.32

--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu  ---
Fixed for 2.32 and 2.31 branch.

-- 
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


[Bug gas/23418] Incorrect xmmword is accepted

2018-07-18 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23418

--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org  ---
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu :

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=11a322db5c8bc23009e97af30180d6b14d86dbd3

commit 11a322db5c8bc23009e97af30180d6b14d86dbd3
Author: H.J. Lu 
Date:   Wed Jul 18 05:33:36 2018 -0700

x86: Split vcvtps2{,u}qq and vcvttps2{,u}qq

After

commit 1b54b8d7e4fc8055f9220a5287e8a94d8a65a88d
Author: Jan Beulich 
Date:   Mon Dec 18 09:36:14 2017 +0100

x86: fold RegXMM/RegYMM/RegZMM into RegSIMD

... qualified by their respective sizes, allowing to drop FirstXmm0 at
the same time.

folded RegXMM, RegYMM and RegZMM into RegSIMD, it's no longer impossible
to distinguish if Xmmword can represent a memory reference when operand
specification contains SIMD register. For example, template operands
specification like these

RegXMM|...|Xmmword|...

and

RegXMM|...

The Xmmword bitfield is always set by RegXMM which is represented by
"RegSIMD|Xmmword".  This patch splits each of vcvtps2qq, vcvtps2uqq,
vcvttps2qq and vcvttps2uqq into 2 templates: one template only has
RegXMM source operand and the other only has mempry source operand.

gas/

PR gas/23418
* testsuite/gas/i386/xmmword.s: Add tests for vcvtps2qq,
vcvtps2uqq, vcvttps2qq and vcvttps2uqq.
* testsuite/gas/i386/xmmword.l: Updated.

opcodes/

PR gas/23418
* i386-opc.h (Byte): Update comments.
(Word): Likewise.
(Dword): Likewise.
(Fword): Likewise.
(Qword): Likewise.
(Tbyte): Likewise.
(Xmmword): Likewise.
(Ymmword): Likewise.
(Zmmword): Likewise.
* i386-opc.tbl: Split vcvtps2qq, vcvtps2uqq, vcvttps2qq and
vcvttps2uqq.
* i386-tbl.h: Regenerated.

-- 
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


[Bug ld/23426] New: ld manual is inconsistent with reality w.r.t. default --hash-style value

2018-07-18 Thread vlad at ispras dot ru
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23426

Bug ID: 23426
   Summary: ld manual is inconsistent with reality w.r.t. default
--hash-style value
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.32 (HEAD)
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ld
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: vlad at ispras dot ru
  Target Milestone: ---

This was introduced in 2760f24c4942853eac7b921e4b8843d57a602654
where the default hash style was made configurable.

The documentation (ld/ld.texi) should reflect this change.

Currenly it says

'--hash-style=STYLE'
... The default is 'sysv'.

For all platforms and configurations (and this is now false
by default for e.g. x86-64 linux).

-- 
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


[Bug binutils/23405] Some inputs may cause objcopy to crash, without being detected by error checking or assertions

2018-07-18 Thread zhanggen12 at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23405

--- Comment #4 from zhanggen12 at hotmail dot com ---
(In reply to Alan Modra from comment #3)
> Yes, I see a segfault with 2.30, but don't with 2.31.  I don't believe we
> should be spending time fixing bugs that are only tickled by fuzzed objects,
> on anything but master binutils.
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 22887 ***

Hi, Alan. I checked out Binutils official download website
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/binutils/. 2.31 was uploaded in 2018-7-14. But I
submitted bug 23405 in 2018-7-12. And I was told my bug is fixed in 2.31. And I
just wanna know, is there any other websites where Binutils 2.31 can be
downloaded before I submitted bug 23405? I just cannot understand this logic.

-- 
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


[Bug binutils/23405] Some inputs may cause objcopy to crash, without being detected by error checking or assertions

2018-07-18 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23405

--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu  ---
(In reply to zhanggen12 from comment #4)
> (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #3)
> > Yes, I see a segfault with 2.30, but don't with 2.31.  I don't believe we
> > should be spending time fixing bugs that are only tickled by fuzzed objects,
> > on anything but master binutils.
> > 
> > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 22887 ***
> 
> Hi, Alan. I checked out Binutils official download website
> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/binutils/. 2.31 was uploaded in 2018-7-14. But I
> submitted bug 23405 in 2018-7-12. And I was told my bug is fixed in 2.31.
> And I just wanna know, is there any other websites where Binutils 2.31 can
> be downloaded before I submitted bug 23405? I just cannot understand this
> logic.

You should also test the latest release branch, binutils-2_31-branch,
which was created on June 24, 2018.

-- 
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