[Bug binutils/19020] objcopy interleave feature broken

2016-10-06 Thread sandra at codesourcery dot com 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19020

sandra at codesourcery dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||sandra at codesourcery dot com

--- Comment #9 from sandra at codesourcery dot com ---
The test cases added for this PR are failing in remote-host testing because the
piece added to run_dump_test is only copying the file locally and not
downloading it to the remote host.  So the tests end up running objcopy on
whatever $tempfile was left over on the remote host from the previous test,
instead of the intended file.

-- 
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/20535] DSO1 needed by DSO2 linked into executable not found without -rpath-link, even though DT_RPATH and -rpath would find it

2016-10-06 Thread nickc at redhat dot com 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20535

--- Comment #4 from Nick Clifton  ---
Created attachment 9554
  --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9554=edit
Proposed patch

-- 
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/20649] [MIPS] Can't find matching LO16 reloc

2016-10-06 Thread ma...@linux-mips.org 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20649

--- Comment #5 from Maciej W. Rozycki  ---
Sure, the GNU GPL applies.  Due to other commitments it'll take me a
few days yet to get the test cases made, but I don't plan to change the
code update itself any further, so any future merge from upstream
Debian people will make should result in an easy to resolve "can be
reverse-applied" result.

NB I'm still waiting to have my Bugzilla permissions restored (there's
been some confusion around it), which is why I wasn't able to update
the status of this bug.

-- 
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/20659] Objcopy and change section lma failing

2016-10-06 Thread nickc at redhat dot com 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20659

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||nickc at redhat dot com

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

  Is this actually an error ?  According to the sources that I looked at(*)
this message is actually a warning, not an error, and the objcopy does proceed
correctly.

  The message itself is meant to be informatory - ie it is telling you that the
.MIPS-abiflags section is allocatable (it has SHF_ALLOC flag set) but it is not
covered by any of the memory regions described in the ELF program headers. 
Which means that *if* the file is loaded into memory using only the information
in the program headers, then the .MIPS.abiflags section will be missed.

Cheers
  Nick

(*) - I am looking at the current binutils development sources.  You reported
this bug against the 2.24 sources, which are really quite old now.  It may be
that the "allocate section not in segment" message was an error back then.  In
which case you can probably solve the problem by upgrading to a newer set of
binutils sources.

-- 
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/20641] powerpc: Should not allow three-operand cmp[l][i]

2016-10-06 Thread segher at gcc dot gnu.org 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20641

--- Comment #9 from Segher Boessenkool  ---
Hi Markus,

Yes, various things in the kernel were broken.  You found another one.

Note you are looking at an old kernel.  Newer kernels have this (namely,
the IDLE_STATE_ENTER_SEQ macro) in arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpuidle.h;
and it is still broken.

I'll do a patch.

-- 
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/20649] [MIPS] Can't find matching LO16 reloc

2016-10-06 Thread james410 at cowgill dot org.uk 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20649

--- Comment #4 from James Cowgill  ---
Maciej, is it OK for me to ask for your patch to be applied to the Debian
binutils package?

-- 
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 gprof/20656] double assignment in source.c

2016-10-06 Thread nickc at redhat dot com 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20656

Nick Clifton  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 CC||nickc at redhat dot com
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Nick Clifton  ---
It was just a coding oversight.  I have checked in a patch to remove the
redundant assignment.

-- 
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 gprof/20656] double assignment in source.c

2016-10-06 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20656

--- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org  ---
The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton :

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=6bd7996d3d45d9dfcbf695ec680fb43b5275ee89

commit 6bd7996d3d45d9dfcbf695ec680fb43b5275ee89
Author: Tom Tromey 
Date:   Thu Oct 6 12:51:47 2016 +0100

Remove redundant assignment in gprof.

PR gprof/20656
* source.c (annotate_source): Delete redundant assignment to
new_line.

-- 
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/20648] over cautious .cfi_sections consistency check

2016-10-06 Thread mpf at gcc dot gnu.org 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20648

Matthew Fortune  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #2 from Matthew Fortune  ---
Fixed on 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 gas/20648] over cautious .cfi_sections consistency check

2016-10-06 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20648

--- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org  ---
The master branch has been updated by Matthew Fortune :

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=3d3424e9a8d6ad56160b98bf6e223c0346164468

commit 3d3424e9a8d6ad56160b98bf6e223c0346164468
Author: Matthew Fortune 
Date:   Thu Sep 29 11:13:46 2016 +0100

Refine .cfi_sections check to only consider compact eh_frame

The .cfi_sections directive can be safely used multiple times
with different sections named at any time unless the compact form
of exception handling is requested after CFI information has
been emitted.  Only the compact form of CFI information changes
the way in which CFI is generated and therefore cannot be
retrospectively requested after generating CFI information.

gas/

PR gas/20648
* dw2gencfi.c (dot_cfi_sections): Refine the check for
inconsistent .cfi_sections to only consider compact vs non
compact forms.
* testsuite/gas/cfi/cfi-common-9.d: New file.
* testsuite/gas/cfi/cfi-common-9.s: New file.
* testsuite/gas/cfi/cfi.exp: Run new test.

-- 
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

Re: Infinite recursion in binutils 2.27 (ld, gdb, c++filt)

2016-10-06 Thread Nick Clifton 
Hi Matthieu,

> We are hitting an infinite recursion in "ld", eventually leading to a 
> stackoverflow 

Please could you file a bug report at:

  https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi?product=gcc

(Note - this is the GCC bug reporting system not the binutils bug reporting
system.  This is because the bug is in the C++ demangling functions provided
by libiberty.  The libiberty library is used by both GCC and binutils, but it
is officially maintained as part of the GCC package).

> $ /opt/imc/gcc-6.2.0/bin/g++ -fPIC -std=c++14 -O3 -ggdb -o main.cpp.o -c 
> main.cpp

When you file the report it would be helpful if you could skip this step, and
instead upload the main.cpp.o file.  Anyone attempting to reproduce the problem
may not have exactly the same version of g++ available as the one you used, and 
so eliminating the compiler makes things simpler.

> $ /opt/imc/gcc-6.2.0/bin/g++ -fPIC -std=c++14 -shared -o libCrash.so 
> main.cpp.o -Wl,--version-script=simple.map
> collect2: fatal error: ld terminated with signal 11 [Segmentation fault]
> compilation terminated.

Please do include this command line however, and the simple.map script.

It would also be worth noting in the report that the problem is an infinite
loop between the libiberty/cp-demangle.c:d_print_comp() and d_comp_print_inner()
functions.


> $ c++filt --version
> GNU c++filt version 2.23.52.0.1-55.el7 20130226
> 
> $ /opt/imc/gcc-6.2.0/bin/ld --version
> GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.27

> However the symbol reported in this one does crash c++filt (although not ld):
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70909

That is almost certainly because the version of c++filt that you are using is
based upon an older binutils release (2.23), whereas the linker is based upon
a newer release (2.27).

Cheers
  Nick


___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

[Bug gas/20641] powerpc: Should not allow three-operand cmp[l][i]

2016-10-06 Thread markus at trippelsdorf dot de 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20641

Markus Trippelsdorf  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||markus at trippelsdorf dot de

--- Comment #8 from Markus Trippelsdorf  ---
Well, it breaks building the Linux kernel, e.g.:

trippels@gcc2-power8 linux-4.7.2 % as -v -I ./arch/powerpc/include -I
arch/powerpc/include/generated/uapi -I arch/powerpc/include/generated -I
include -I ./arch/powerpc/include/uapi -I arch/powerpc/include/generated/uapi
-I ./include/uapi -I include/generated/uapi -I arch/powerpc -I arch/powerpc
-a64 -mpower7 -many -mlittle -o arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.o idle_power7.s
GNU assembler version 2.27.51 (powerpc64le-unknown-linux-gnu) using BFD version
(GNU Binutils) 2.27.51.20161006
arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.S: Assembler messages:
arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.S:154: Error: missing operand
arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.S:188: Error: missing operand
arch/powerpc/kernel/idle_power7.S:231: Error: missing operand

-- 
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