[Bug gas/21874] x86: Multiple segment registers in the address are not detected with -masm=intel

2017-11-13 Thread jbeulich at novell dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874 --- Comment #19 from Jan Beulich --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #18) > (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #17) > > This is a tentative patch which could replace the bad one. Only tested on > > 2.29.1 so far. > > Does GCC behave the

[Bug binutils/22434] dwarf2.c doesn't use debug info specified by DW_AT_GNU_dwo_name

2017-11-13 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|addr2line doesn't use debug |dwarf2.c doesn't use debug

[Bug binutils/22434] addr2line doesn't use debug info specified by DW_AT_GNU_dwo_name

2017-11-13 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug gold/22233] [2.29 Regression] gold segfault in relocate_erratum_stub on aarch64-linux-gnu

2017-11-13 Thread jrtc27 at jrtc27 dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22233 James Clarke changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jrtc27 at jrtc27 dot com --- Comment

[Bug binutils/22434] addr2line inline resolving doesn't work with split dwarf

2017-11-13 Thread jpoimboe at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434 Josh Poimboeuf changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jpoimboe at redhat dot com -- You

[Bug ld/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug binutils/22434] addr2line inline resolving doesn't work with split dwarf

2017-11-13 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com -- You are

[Bug binutils/22434] New: addr2line inline resolving doesn't work with split dwarf

2017-11-13 Thread andi-bz at firstfloor dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22434 Bug ID: 22434 Summary: addr2line inline resolving doesn't work with split dwarf Product: binutils Version: 2.29 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug binutils/22426] objcopy crashes with fabricated file

2017-11-13 Thread yeokaiyeat at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22426 --- Comment #3 from ky --- Apologies for missing this out, the command used to run both test case is “./objcopy ./FILE_NAME” where terminal is in the directory of objcopy -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for

[Bug binutils/22426] objcopy crashes with fabricated file

2017-11-13 Thread yeokaiyeat at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22426 --- Comment #2 from ky --- (In reply to ky from comment #0) > Created attachment 10584 [details] > testcase that crashes objcopy > > hello, during a fuzzing attempt on objcopy in binutils (2.26.1), fuzzed file > produces a crash when a

[Bug binutils/22426] objcopy crashes with fabricated file

2017-11-13 Thread yeokaiyeat at hotmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22426 --- Comment #1 from ky --- Created attachment 10588 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10588=edit memory exhaustion added another test case for memory exhaustion -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the

[Bug gas/21874] x86: Multiple segment registers in the address are not detected with -masm=intel

2017-11-13 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874 --- Comment #18 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #17) > This is a tentative patch which could replace the bad one. Only tested on > 2.29.1 so far. > Does GCC behave the same with and without -asm=intel with your

[Bug gas/21874] x86: Multiple segment registers in the address are not detected with -masm=intel

2017-11-13 Thread jbeulich at novell dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874 --- Comment #17 from Jan Beulich --- This is a tentative patch which could replace the bad one. Only tested on 2.29.1 so far. --- 2.29.1/gas/config/tc-i386-intel.c +++ 2.29.1/gas/config/tc-i386-intel.c @@ -411,7 +413,19 @@ static int

[Bug gold/22233] [2.29 Regression] gold segfault in relocate_erratum_stub on aarch64-linux-gnu

2017-11-13 Thread peter.smith at linaro dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22233 --- Comment #2 from Peter Smith --- This is related to PR21868, the fix for that PR has a bug that triggers when the stub_owner section also needs erratum fixes. In this case the address of the thunks is not calculated correctly, resulting in

[Bug gold/22233] [2.29 Regression] gold segfault in relocate_erratum_stub on aarch64-linux-gnu

2017-11-13 Thread peter.smith at linaro dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22233 Peter Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||peter.smith at linaro dot org ---

[Bug ld/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 --- Comment #1 from Murilo Opsfelder Araújo --- Talking to Alan Modra, he mentioned that this `is the combination of -pie, undefined weak symbols, and a kernel script that throws away .plt that triggers the ld segfault`. -- You are

[Bug ld/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Murilo Opsfelder Araújo changed: What|Removed |Added Component|binutils|ld -- You are receiving

[Bug binutils/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Murilo Opsfelder Araújo changed: What|Removed |Added Target||powerpc64*-linux-gnu --

[Bug gas/21874] x86: Multiple segment registers in the address are not detected with -masm=intel

2017-11-13 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874 --- Comment #16 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #15) > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12) > > (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #11) > > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > > > > Do you have a real

[Bug binutils/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Murilo Opsfelder Araújo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael at ellerman dot

[Bug binutils/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Murilo Opsfelder Araújo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mopsfelder at gmail dot com

[Bug binutils/22431] ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Murilo Opsfelder Araújo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||amodra at gmail dot com --

[Bug binutils/22431] New: ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le

2017-11-13 Thread mopsfelder at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22431 Bug ID: 22431 Summary: ld (binutils-2.29) segfaults when building Linux kernel (v4.14) on Fedora 26 ppc64le Product: binutils Version: 2.29 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug gas/21874] x86: Multiple segment registers in the address are not detected with -masm=intel

2017-11-13 Thread jbeulich at novell dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21874 --- Comment #15 from Jan Beulich --- (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #12) > (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #11) > > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #10) > > > Do you have a real example? > > > > No, I don't. But I don't assume you