http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423
--- Comment #4 from vincenzo Innocente <vincenzo.innocente at cern dot ch> 2011-04-03 20:05:37 UTC --- thanks for the hint. the version on http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/binutils-2.21.51.0.7.x86_64.tar.bz2 seems to be ok it also produces (as the one in your branch) a correct stacktrace the version of gold (ld -v GNU gold (Linux/GNU Binutils 2.21.51.0.7.20110306) 1.11) instead produced still a corrupted stack trace as in 2.2.1 (see below) I submitted a bug report to binutil using a different test case. let's see if there is any feedback on that vincenzo from gdb when using gold --------------------------------------------------------------- b bhook Function "bhook" not defined. Make breakpoint pending on future shared library load? (y or [n]) y Breakpoint 1 (bhook) pending. (gdb) run ….. Breakpoint 1, 0x00007ffff7ec90e0 in bhook () from ./plugD.so Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install glibc-2.12-1.7.el6_0.4.x86_64 (gdb) where #0 0x00007ffff7ec90e0 in bhook () from ./plugD.so #1 0x00007ffff7ec9199 in global constructors keyed to 65535_0_ccdzuBFD.o.3947.2223 () from ./plugD.so #2 0x00007fffffffd348 in ?? () #3 0x00007ffff7ec7778 in ?? () from ./plugD.so #4 0x00007ffff7ecab60 in __CTOR_LIST__ () from ./plugD.so #5 0x00007fffffffd310 in ?? () #6 0x0000000000403800 in ?? () #7 0x00007ffff7ec92f5 in __do_global_ctors_aux () from ./plugD.so Backtrace stopped: previous frame inner to this frame (corrupt stack?) -------------------------------------------- same using the "new" ld.bfd Breakpoint 1, 0x00007ffff78cbfa0 in bhook () from ./plugD.so Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install glibc-2.12-1.7.el6_0.4.x86_64 (gdb) where #0 0x00007ffff78cbfa0 in bhook () from ./plugD.so #1 0x00007ffff78cb889 in global constructors keyed to 65535_0_ccdhvqmO.o.3947.2223 () from ./plugD.so #2 0x0000003ff520e3ff in _dl_init_internal () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #3 0x0000003ff5212b21 in dl_open_worker () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #4 0x0000003ff520e016 in _dl_catch_error () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #5 0x0000003ff521236a in _dl_open () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #6 0x0000003ff5a00f66 in dlopen_doit () from /lib64/libdl.so.2 #7 0x0000003ff520e016 in _dl_catch_error () from /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 #8 0x0000003ff5a0129c in _dlerror_run () from /lib64/libdl.so.2 #9 0x0000003ff5a00ee1 in dlopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 () from /lib64/libdl.so.2 #10 0x000000000040119d in get () #11 0x0000000000400e78 in main () On 3 Apr, 2011, at 8:06 PM, hjl.tools at gmail dot com wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48423 > > --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu <hjl.tools at gmail dot com> 2011-04-03 18:06:23 > UTC --- > (In reply to comment #2) >> thanks hl, >> it looks promising. >> the thets runs and >> nm -C -D libBase.o >> shows >> 0000000000201140 V typeinfo for Base >> 0000000000000fb3 V typeinfo name for Base >> like gold >> >> I will test it more tomorrow. >> Will you merge this in next binutil snapshot? >> > > It isn't up to me. But it is in the latest Linux binutils from: > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/ > > -- > Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug.
