[Bug binutils/23199] Phobos static lib not build properly anymore after update to binutils 2.30 on NixOS

[thomas.mader at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23199

--- Comment #1 from Thomas Mader  ---
The problematic static phobos lib can be found under
https://drive.google.com/file/d/179Nvnk7D3YLO5iQ3-zNAJl-7TDHw_twU/view?usp=sharing
It was too big to attach directly.

-- 
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/23199] New: Phobos static lib not build properly anymore after update to binutils 2.30 on NixOS

[thomas.mader at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23199

Bug ID: 23199
   Summary: Phobos static lib not build properly anymore after
update to binutils 2.30 on NixOS
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.30
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: binutils
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: thomas.mader at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

As suggested in https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-05/msg00183.html I open
this bug.

As already mentioned in my newsgroup question at
https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-05/msg00180.html I wonder how it is
possible to have such a bug in NixOS while on Archlinux it works with the same
version of binutils (2.30).

Maybe it has something to do with the different configure switches with which
the two distributions are building binutils?

NixOS:
https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/3027bca02aa2ab50393cb9a8924ad73284d2700b/pkgs/development/tools/misc/binutils/default.nix
Archlinux:
https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/plain/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/binutils=26c1ad8f31e6c4416d1f83275a586d6afa6167b8

-- 
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/23189] bad symbol index: ffffffff

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23189

--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu  ---
A patch is posted at

https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2018-05/msg00182.html

-- 
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/23189] bad symbol index: ffffffff

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23189

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed||2018-05-17
   Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org   |hjl.tools at gmail dot 
com
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

-- 
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/23194] Building glibc 2.27 on 32-bit Intel with binutils 2.30 segfaults in elf subdir

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23194

H.J. Lu  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed||2018-05-17
 CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu  ---
Please try binutils-2_30-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 ld/23189] bad symbol index: ffffffff

[pangbw at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23189

--- Comment #3 from Baoshan  ---
I checked a little bit of the code, what I see for this issue the difference
between 2.29 and 2.30 is that:
For 2.29 the checking if a symbol is hidden is before the calling of function
elf_x86_64_convert_load_reloc, but in 2.30 they are in opposite order.

-- 
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/23189] bad symbol index: ffffffff

[pangbw at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23189

--- Comment #2 from Baoshan  ---
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #1)
> Hi Baoshan,
> 
>   I cannot reproduce this problem using today's mainline development
>   sources.  Please could you check and see if the problem still exists
>   for you ?
> 
> Cheers
>   Nick

Hi Nick,

I don't see any difference with the mainline development sources, I am using
the code from: git://sourceware.org/git/binutils-gdb.git

Can you reproduce the issue with 2.30?

Thanks,
Baoshan

-- 
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/23078] Weak alias to a weak symbol is not resolved correctly.

[nickc at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23078

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nickc at redhat dot com

--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton  ---
Hi Vadzim,

> VECTORS array points to a weak function instead of a strong function defined
> in main.c

I think that this is a bug in your test code.  You should be using the
weakref attribute here, rather than the weak and alias attributes.  IE:

  static __attribute__((weakref ("DEFAULT_HANDLER"))) void HARD_FAULT ();

and similarly for BUS_FAULT.

Cheers
  Nick

-- 
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/23189] bad symbol index: ffffffff

[nickc at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23189

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nickc at redhat dot com

--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton  ---
Hi Baoshan,

  I cannot reproduce this problem using today's mainline development
  sources.  Please could you check and see if the problem still exists
  for you ?

Cheers
  Nick

-- 
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/23107] 'ar t' doesn't display object file offsets

[nickc at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23107

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nickc at redhat dot com

--- Comment #1 from Nick Clifton  ---
Hi Ant,

  [Sorry for the long delay in responding to this PR].

> I was looking for a way to display offsets of the object files in an archive
> using ar, but apparently there is none the tool provides. I've prepared and
> attached a patch that fixes it, yet I'm not sure that offsets should be
> displayed in the non-verbose mode.
> 
> What do you think?

I like the idea, but I think that it should be controlled by a new command
line option, which would be off by default.  Would you care to update your 
patch to do this ?  Note - doing so no only involves changing the code, but
also updating the documentation (binutils/doc/binutils.texi), the NEWS file
(binutils/NEWS) and, ideally, adding a binutils test as well
(binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/).

Cheers
  Nick

-- 
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/23195] [AArch64] ld-aarch64/ifunc-9 failing

[hjl.tools at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23195

--- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu  ---
(In reply to Sudakshina Das from comment #0)
> 
> I have observed the following failure on aarch64-none-linux-gnu
> 
> succeeded with: <>, expected: <.*dynamic STT_GNU_IFUNC symbol `foo' with
> pointer equality in `.*.o' can not be used when making an executable;
> recompile with -fPIE and relink with -pie>
> 
> FAIL: ld-aarch64/ifunc-9
> 
> I have also observed some of the new tests failing:
> FAIL: Build pr23169a
> FAIL: Build pr23169d
> FAIL: Run pr23169a
> FAIL: Run pr23169d

You can use the x86 approach to fix it.

-- 
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/23195] [AArch64] ld-aarch64/ifunc-9 failing

[vidyapraveen at arm dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23195

Vidya Praveen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com,
   ||vidyapraveen at arm dot com

-- 
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/23195] [AArch64] ld-aarch64/ifunc-9 failing

[sudi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23195

Sudakshina Das  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||aarch64-none-linux-gnu

-- 
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/23195] New: [AArch64] ld-aarch64/ifunc-9 failing

[sudi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23195

Bug ID: 23195
   Summary: [AArch64] ld-aarch64/ifunc-9 failing
   Product: binutils
   Version: unspecified
Status: NEW
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ld
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: sudi at gcc dot gnu.org
  Target Milestone: ---

Since the following commit:

commit 4ec0995016801cc5d5cf13baf6e10163861e6852
Author: H.J. Lu 
Date:   Mon May 14 03:55:37 2018 -0700

x86; Allow IFUNC pointer defined in PDE

If IFUNC symbol is defined in position-dependent executable, we should
change it to the normal function and set its address to its PLT entry
which should be resolved by R_*_IRELATIVE at run-time.  All external
references should be resolved to its PLT in executable.

bfd/

PR ld/23169
* elf-ifunc.c (_bfd_elf_allocate_ifunc_dyn_relocs): Don't issue
an error on IFUNC pointer defined in PDE.
* elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_finish_dynamic_symbol): Call
_bfd_x86_elf_link_fixup_ifunc_symbol.
* elf64-x86-64.c (elf_x86_64_finish_dynamic_symbol): Likewise.
* elfxx-x86.c (_bfd_x86_elf_link_fixup_ifunc_symbol): New
function.
* elfxx-x86.h (_bfd_x86_elf_link_fixup_ifunc_symbol): New.

ld/

PR ld/23169
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc-9-i386.d: New file.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc-9-x86-64.d: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169a.c: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169a.rd: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169b.c: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169b.c: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169c.rd: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/pr23169c.rd: Likewise.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc-9-x86.d: Removed.
* testsuite/ld-ifunc/ifunc.exp: Run PR ld/23169 tests.

I have observed the following failure on aarch64-none-linux-gnu

succeeded with: <>, expected: <.*dynamic STT_GNU_IFUNC symbol `foo' with
pointer equality in `.*.o' can not be used when making an executable; recompile
with -fPIE and relink with -pie>

FAIL: ld-aarch64/ifunc-9

I have also observed some of the new tests failing:
FAIL: Build pr23169a
FAIL: Build pr23169d
FAIL: Run pr23169a
FAIL: Run pr23169d

-- 
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/23194] Building glibc 2.27 on 32-bit Intel with binutils 2.30 segfaults in elf subdir

[mail at andreasbaumann dot cc]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23194

Andreas Baumann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target|i686|i686-pc-linux-gnu
   Host||i686-pc-linux-gnu
  Build||i686-pc-linux-gnu

-- 
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/23194] Building glibc 2.27 on 32-bit Intel with binutils 2.30 segfaults in elf subdir

[mail at andreasbaumann dot cc]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23194

Andreas Baumann  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Target||i686

-- 
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/23194] New: Building glibc 2.27 on 32-bit Intel with binutils 2.30 segfaults in elf subdir

[mail at andreasbaumann dot cc]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23194

Bug ID: 23194
   Summary: Building glibc 2.27 on 32-bit Intel with binutils 2.30
segfaults in elf subdir
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.30
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: ld
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: mail at andreasbaumann dot cc
  Target Milestone: ---

Building in glibc-2.27/elf/:

make[3]: Leaving directory '/root/glibc/src/glibc-2.27/elf'
gcc   -nostdlib -nostartfiles -shared -o
/root/glibc/src/glibc-build/elf/ld.so.new  \
  -Wl,-z,combreloc -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--hash-style=both -Wl,-z,defs
-Wl,-z,now\
  /root/glibc/src/glibc-build/elf/librtld.os
-Wl,--version-script=/root/glibc/src/glibc-build/ld.map \
  -Wl,-soname=ld-linux.so.2 \
  -Wl,-defsym=_begin=0
collect2: fatal error: ld terminated with signal 11 [Segmentation fault], core
dumped
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [Makefile:478: /root/glibc/src/glibc-build/elf/ld.so] Error 1


Core was generated by `/usr/bin/ld -plugin
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/8.1.0/liblto_plugin.so -plug'.
Program terminated with signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
#0  0xb7e70916 in bfd_getl32 (p=0x120c8658) at
/root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/libbfd.c:561
561   return v;
(gdb) bt
#0  0xb7e70916 in bfd_getl32 (p=0x120c8658) at
/root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/libbfd.c:561
#1  0xb7e90ecc in bfd_elf32_swap_symbol_in (abfd=0x20c0f40, psrc=0x120c8658,
pshn=0x0, dst=0xbfc60d40)
at /root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/elfcode.h:183
#2  0xb7e84383 in elf_i386_reloc_type_class (info=0x5cf0a0 ,
rel_sec=0x20d4264,
rela=0x218346c) at /root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/elf32-i386.c:3965
#3  0xb7ebed3f in elf_link_sort_relocs (psec=, info=0x5cf0a0
,
abfd=0x20c0f40) at /root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/elflink.c:9124
#4  bfd_elf_final_link () at
/root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/bfd/elflink.c:12315
#5  0x0043a130 in ldwrite () at
/root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/ld/ldwrite.c:581
#6  0x0042013f in main (argc=, argv=)
at /root/binutils/src/binutils-2.30/ld/ldmain.c:448

-- 
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/23192] New: aarch64: indexed fcmla doesn't support all registers

[i-bugzilla-sourceware-org-kasujfzh at rf dot risimo.net]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23192

Bug ID: 23192
   Summary: aarch64: indexed fcmla doesn't support all registers
   Product: binutils
   Version: 2.30
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: gas
  Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
  Reporter: i-bugzilla-sourceware-org-kasujfzh at rf dot risimo.net
  Target Milestone: ---

$ cat fcmla.asm
.global main
.section .text
.balign 4

main:
fcmla v0.8h,v1.8h,v2.h[0],#270
fcmla v0.8h,v0.8h,v27.h[0],#270
ret
$ as -mcpu=saphira -o fcmla.o fcmla.asm
fcmla.asm: Assembler messages:
fcmla.asm:7: Error: register number out of range 0 to 15 at operand 3 -- `fcmla
v0.8h,v0.8h,v27.h[0],#270'
$

According to the docs I have there no restriction to the range of the third
register since the full 5 bits are encoded in M:Rm and M can be 1.

There is a related bug in objdump which says that such opcodes with M=1 (like
for example 0x6f5b7000) are invalid. If required I will file another issue for
this.

-- 
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