[Bug ld/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[jeremip11 at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Jeremi  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jeremip11 at gmail 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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[nickc at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

--- Comment #9 from Nick Clifton  ---
(In reply to Romain Geissler from comment #7)

> Given that this
> might potentially happen arbitrarily to any user of binutils 2.30 and it is
> not so easy to understand that section placement is wrong here, would you
> please backport this to the 2.30 branch ?

Done.

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

--- Comment #8 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org  ---
The binutils-2_30-branch branch has been updated by Nick Clifton
:

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=355d8ed79b1e830d5216a70026f751f5a38df9e9

commit 355d8ed79b1e830d5216a70026f751f5a38df9e9
Author: Nick Clifton 
Date:   Thu Feb 15 16:21:02 2018 +

Import patch from mainline to fix a bug that would place executable and
non-executables pages in the same segment.

PR 22758
bfd * elf.c (_bfd_elf_map_sections_to_segments): Don't start a new
segment when demand paged with lma on the same page.  Test this
before load/non-load, executable/non-executable,
writable/non-writable tests and simplify.  Delete bogus relro
condition in writable/non-writable test.  Delete outdated
comment.  Formatting.

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[romain.geissler at amadeus dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Romain Geissler  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||romain.geissler at amadeus dot 
com

--- Comment #7 from Romain Geissler  ---
Hi,

Long story short, I was trying to build clang in PGO+LTO bootstrap mode the
last few days, and the bootstrap fails with a segfault at the moment clang is
ran on the profiling data set.

I hunted down the issue to the fact that in some LLVM libraries, "atexit"
function is inlined and included in the loaded shared libraries, but placed in
a section that ld.so mapped in a RW segment rather than a RE segment, and both
segment are not correctly aligned to the boundary of a 2MB page like it should.

When applying this patch, the bootstrap of clang works. Given that this might
potentially happen arbitrarily to any user of binutils 2.30 and it is not so
easy to understand that section placement is wrong here, would you please
backport this to the 2.30 branch ?

Thanks,
Romain

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[amodra at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #6 from Alan Modra  ---
Fixed master.

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

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

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=76cb3a89a6615cf3418fa1efe8268bf6673a5c8a

commit 76cb3a89a6615cf3418fa1efe8268bf6673a5c8a
Author: Alan Modra 
Date:   Tue Jan 30 16:02:32 2018 +1030

PR22758, FAIL: Run pr22393-2

We can't map different disk pages into the same memory page; The last
page mapped will simply overwrite any previous pages.  The
executable/non-executable new_segment test ignored this fact, leading
to a ld.so segfault on hppa when .dynamic is overwritten with zeros.

This patch moves existing tests for demand paging with lma on the same
memory page, to a new test performed before any case where we want a
new segment due to protection or loadable conflicts.

PR 22758
* elf.c (_bfd_elf_map_sections_to_segments): Don't start a new
segment when demand paged with lma on the same page.  Test this
before load/non-load, executable/non-executable,
writable/non-writable tests and simplify.  Delete bogus relro
condition in writable/non-writable test.  Delete outdated
comment.  Formatting.

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[amodra at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|amodra at gmail dot com|
   Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org   |amodra at gmail 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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[amodra at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Alan Modra  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||amodra at gmail dot com

--- Comment #4 from Alan Modra  ---
Here are pr22393-2 program headers and section to header mapping:

  PHDR   0x34 0x00010034 0x00010034 0x00140 0x00140 R   0x4
  INTERP 0x000174 0x00010174 0x00010174 0xd 0xd R   0x1
  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib/ld.so.1]
  LOAD   0x00 0x0001 0x0001 0x0043c 0x0043c R   0x1000
  LOAD   0x001000 0x00011000 0x00011000 0x00554 0x00554 R E 0x1000
  LOAD   0x002000 0x00012000 0x00012000 0x00118 0x00118 R   0x1000
  LOAD   0x003000 0x00013000 0x00013000 0x000f8 0x000f8 RW  0x1000
  LOAD   0x0040f8 0x000130f8 0x000130f8 0x00064 0x00064 RWE 0x1000
  LOAD   0x00515c 0x0001315c 0x0001315c 0x0001c 0x0002c RW  0x1000
  DYNAMIC0x003020 0x00013020 0x00013020 0x000d0 0x000d0 RW  0x4
  NOTE   0x000184 0x00010184 0x00010184 0x00044 0x00044 R   0x4

   00 
   01 .interp 
   02 .interp .note.ABI-tag .note.gnu.build-id .hash .gnu.hash .dynsym
.dynstr .gnu.version .gnu.version_r .rela.plt 
   03 .init .text .fini 
   04 .rodata .PARISC.unwind .eh_frame 
   05 .init_array .ctors .dtors .data.rel.ro .dynamic .data 
   06 .plt 
   07 .got .bss 
   08 .dynamic 
   09 .note.ABI-tag .note.gnu.build-id 

There's a problem with the last 3 PT_LOAD headers.  They can't be mapped from
different disk pages (0x3000, 0x4000 and 0x5000) into the same memory page
(0x13000).

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Eric Botcazou  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou  ---
Let me add that we have the same couple of failures on SPARC64/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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[dave.anglin at bell dot net]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

--- Comment #2 from dave.anglin at bell dot net ---
Hi Nick,

On 2018-01-29 9:18 AM, nickc at redhat dot com wrote:
>Please could you narrow this down to the linker command line and a tarball
>of the object files & libraries involved ?  (I do not have easy access to
>an hppa based build system).
I'll try to look at this as soon as I can.  Alan has an account on a 
hppa-linux system.

Dave

-- 
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/22758] FAIL: Run pr22393-2

[nickc at redhat dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22758

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nickc at redhat dot com

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

  Please could you narrow this down to the linker command line and a tarball 
  of the object files & libraries involved ?  (I do not have easy access to
  an hppa based build system).

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