I am terribly sorry on both counts. I actually had no idea there even was a
test suite. I thought the test folder was just an assortment of files to
manually test against as needed. I will fix this immediately. If it means
anything, I built a few executables already just fine with my changes: I think
most people that have downloaded and used TinyCC in the past few hours should
not have had any problems, unless they ran the tests.
I actually already found out that the relocation was broken only because of my
change that made sections defined in assembly executable. (The change made in
gen_function seems to be fine.) As it turns out, it is because I unknowingly
also changed the behavior of the TOK_ASMDIR_pushsection case, and .pushsection
is used in the tests.
To get to my point: should I fix the problem or fix the test?
I did this in the first place because (I think) most use cases for hand-crafted
assembly are for defining code, not data, but it looks like tcctest.c uses
.pushsection to define data-only sections. In my opinion, I still think the
behavior of my change is generally correct, but it is not clear to me what the
tests using pushsection are doing.
While I await feedback, I will submit a change that fixes both issues.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 06:52, Herman ten Brugge via Tinycc-devel
<tinycc-devel@nongnu.org> wrote:
> On 7/30/24 16:46, Jonathan M. Wilbur wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I recently pushed a commit (e4d874d88a2ef874a9c2fd7c47d3d3a35ae986e2) that
>> fixes code being placed in ELF sections that do not have the executable bit
>> set. This happens when a function is annotated with
>> __attribute__((section(".some_section"))), or when a section is defined via
>> inline assembly. In the latter case, it is assumed that the inline assembly
>> actually contains code, which will not always be the case, but should be the
>> case the vast majority of the time. When the instruction pointer points to
>> code in a non-executable section, a segmentation fault occurs.
>>
>> I have included two files that recreate both of these bugs in
>> tests/exec_section_in_c.c and tests/exec_section_in_asm.c. The patch is
>> included on this email.
>>
>> If anybody has any feedback, I would be curious to know if the blind
>> addition of the executable flag to sections defined in assembly will be a
>> problem: particularly if there is widespread usage of the writeable flag for
>> these, which might elicit segmentation faults from the combined use of the
>> writeable and executable flags for the same page.
>
> Same as previous mail:
>
> You probably did not run 'make test'.
>
> Tests should go into 'tests/tests2' directory.
>
> Some tests do not run.
>
> Looks like you have to revert the patch._______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
