[Bug gas/4089] New: GAS allows using 64-bit regs in 32-bit mode (Intel syntax)
cat ./test.s ; ./as --32 -al -o test.o test.s .intel_syntax noprefix mov [rax],eax GAS LISTING test.s page 1 1.intel_syntax noprefix 2 A300 mov [rax],eax 2 00 because for AT&T syntax GAS correctly complains: cat ./test.s ; ./as --32 -al -o test.o test.s mov %eax,(%rax) test.s: Assembler messages: test.s:1: Error: bad register name `%rax)' GAS LISTING test.s page 1 1mov %eax,(%rax) ./as -v GNU assembler version 2.17.50 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) using BFD version 2.17.50 20070222 -- Summary: GAS allows using 64-bit regs in 32-bit mode (Intel syntax) Product: binutils Version: 2.17 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gas AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com ReportedBy: artyom dot yakimov at intel dot com CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4089 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: binutils-2.15.92.0.2 -M script truncates file names
Hi Joe, I had some problems building VirtualBox on a RedHat 3 ES machine, The "ar" command failed to find an input file -- the message shows a truncated name compared to what is in the script fed in via -M. Looking at the source code it appears that the grammar file that specifies the allowable characters in file names in -M script files is far too restrictive. In my case, I was running in an AFS file system and there was an @ in the path name -- that is not allowd by the grammar. Please could you create a bugzilla bug report for this problem at: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ If you can include a test case to reproduce the problem that will really help. Cheers Nick ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/4090] New: Can't use ADDR on section after
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ /usr/bin/ld -V
GNU ld version 2.15.92.0.2 20040927
Supported emulations:
elf_i386
i386linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ cat foo.t
SECTIONS
{
.bar : AT ((ADDR(.foo) + 4095) & ~(4095)) { *(.bar) }
.foo : { *(.foo) }
/DISCARD/ : { *(.*) }
}
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ cat foo.s
.section .bar,"ax","progbits"
.byte 0
.section .foo,"aw","progbits"
.byte 0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ ld -V
GNU ld version 2.17.50.0.13 20070212
Supported emulations:
elf_i386
i386linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ make LD=ld
ld -m elf_i386 -o foo -T foo.t foo.o
foo.t:7 nonconstant expression for load base
make: *** [foo] Error 1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$ make LD=/usr/bin/ld
/usr/bin/ld -m elf_i386 -o foo -T foo.t foo.o
readelf -S -l --wide foo
There are 6 section headers, starting at offset 0x2028:
Section Headers:
[Nr] Name TypeAddr OffSize ES Flg Lk Inf Al
[ 0] NULL 00 00 00 0 0 0
[ 1] .bar PROGBITS 002000 01 00 AX 0 0 1
[ 2] .foo PROGBITS0001 001001 01 00 WA 0 0 1
[ 3] .shstrtab STRTAB 002001 25 00 0 0 1
[ 4] .symtab SYMTAB 002118 60 10 5 6 4
[ 5] .strtab STRTAB 002178 01 00 0 0 1
Key to Flags:
W (write), A (alloc), X (execute), M (merge), S (strings)
I (info), L (link order), G (group), x (unknown)
O (extra OS processing required) o (OS specific), p (processor specific)
Elf file type is EXEC (Executable file)
Entry point 0x0
There are 2 program headers, starting at offset 52
Program Headers:
Type Offset VirtAddr PhysAddr FileSiz MemSiz Flg Align
LOAD 0x001001 0x0001 0x0001 0x1 0x1 RW 0x1000
LOAD 0x002000 0x 0x1000 0x1 0x1 R E 0x1000
Section to Segment mapping:
Segment Sections...
00 .foo
01 .bar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lma-4]$
--
Summary: Can't use ADDR on section after
Product: binutils
Version: 2.18 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
ReportedBy: hjl at lucon dot org
CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4090
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug ld/4090] Can't use ADDR on section after
--- Additional Comments From hjl at lucon dot org 2007-02-22 10:31 ---
Assuming this change is reasonable, the error message:
foo.t:7 nonconstant expression for load base
is unclear. The problem is
.bar : AT ((ADDR(.foo) + 4095) & ~(4095)) { *(.bar) }
But it isn't line 7. We should at least print out which section's load base
isn't constant.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4090
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 11:07 --- Hi Guys, Can any of you do some checks for me please ? Essentially I would like to know the differences between a working binary that has been stripped with the strip program built from the 2.16.1 sources and the non-workign stripped binary that has been stripped with strip built from the 2.17 sources. It would also help to know if SUN's strip produces the same binary as the 2.16.1 strip. It wouls also help to know if a strip built from the current mainline binutils sources also creates corrupt binaries. Cheers Nick -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3679] sh_entsize not set for .rel.dyn cause an assert to detonate with mips-linux-elf-ld -shared -q
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 11:31 --- Hi Cedric, Can you produce a full test case that demonstrates this problem please ? Also, have you checked to see if the problem still exists with a linker built from the current mainline binutils sources ? Cheers Nick -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3679 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug gas/3943] missassembly of armV6 cps instruction
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 11:34 --- Hi Stefan, This bug has now been fixed. Please try building an assembler from the latest binutils sources from the mainline of the CVS repository. Cheers Nick -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3943 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:36 --- I'm not sure what you mean by "different" - clearly all three are different in at least some ways, as they all have different sizes. The one stripped with the buggy 2.17 version is *much* larger than the unstripped version. I'm not sure if it will help, but I'll upload the following files: Size File 5484 hello (unstripped "hello world" binary) 3572 hello.binutils2.16.1_strip 265716 hello.binutils2.17_strip 3632 hello.sunstrip -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:38 --- Created an attachment (id=1573) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1573&action=view) Unstripped "hello world" binary (Sparc Solaris 8) -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:38 --- Created an attachment (id=1574) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1574&action=view) Stripped with /usr/ccs/bin/strip (fails to run) -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:39 --- Created an attachment (id=1575) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1575&action=view) Stripped with binutils 2.16.1 -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:40 --- Created an attachment (id=1576) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1576&action=view) Stripped with bintutils-2.17 (fails to run) -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
-- What|Removed |Added Attachment #1574|Stripped with |Stripped with description|/usr/ccs/bin/strip (fails to|/usr/ccs/bin/strip |run)| http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 14:43 --- I'm not sure were to get "a strip built from the current mainline binutils sources" but I should be able to try that too if you can point me to it. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
Re: [Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
Hi Peter, I'm not sure were to get "a strip built from the current mainline binutils sources" but I should be able to try that too if you can point me to it. The sources are under CVS control and can be checked out via the procedure documented here: http://sourceware.org/binutils There is no real need for you to do this though, as I have checked myself and these mainline sources also have the problem. I do not know the cause yet, but at least one aspect of the problem is that the corrupt stripped binaries have a bogus .interp section. (Try running 'readelf -l' on them to see this). The bug is something to do with how the BFD library is regenerating the program headers after various sections have been stripped out of the binary. I have tracked the huge size increase down to H.J.'s patch for PR 2258, but I do not know yet what, if anything, is wrong with that patch. Nor do I know if the huge size increase is actually a problem. After all on a file system that supports holes, the huge stripped binaries do not actually take up more disk space than their tiny brethren. Cheers Nick ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 17:55 --- Subject: Re: GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ldissue?) Hi Peter, > I'm not sure were to get "a strip built from the current mainline binutils > sources" but I should be able to try that too if you can point me to it. The sources are under CVS control and can be checked out via the procedure documented here: http://sourceware.org/binutils There is no real need for you to do this though, as I have checked myself and these mainline sources also have the problem. I do not know the cause yet, but at least one aspect of the problem is that the corrupt stripped binaries have a bogus .interp section. (Try running 'readelf -l' on them to see this). The bug is something to do with how the BFD library is regenerating the program headers after various sections have been stripped out of the binary. I have tracked the huge size increase down to H.J.'s patch for PR 2258, but I do not know yet what, if anything, is wrong with that patch. Nor do I know if the huge size increase is actually a problem. After all on a file system that supports holes, the huge stripped binaries do not actually take up more disk space than their tiny brethren. Cheers Nick -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 18:46 --- Created an attachment (id=1577) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1577&action=view) Always regenerate program headers when Solaris INTERP segments are involved. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 18:48 --- Created an attachment (id=1578) --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1578&action=view) Stripped version of the c-cc5 test program -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2007-02-22 18:56 --- Hi Guys, I think that I may have found the problem. When the BFD library is getting ready to write out the program headers it checks to see if it has a set already supplied to it. (Either from the input binary in the case of stripping an executable, or via a linker script). If it does have these headers it tries to use them unless it decides that something has changed between the time the headers were read in and the time that the sections are ready to write out. This check however was not taking into account the special nature of the INTERP header on Solaris, which has a slightly non-standard format. The solution, I think, is to always regenerate the program headers when creating Solaris binaries, although possibly this might break custom Solaris linker scripts. We shall see... In the meantime please could you try applying the uploaded patch to the current mainline binutils sources and then building a new version of strip. This should work. Alternatively please see if you can run the c-cc5-gnustrip.patched.mainline binary which I have also uploaded. This is a stripped version of c-cc5 binary that Simon sent to me. Cheers Nick -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
[Bug binutils/3535] GNU strip 2.17 corrupts Sun CC/cc binaries (ld issue?)
--- Additional Comments From psfales at alcatel-lucent dot com 2007-02-22 21:37 --- That fix worked for me. The stripped binary waz the same length as the one stripped with 2.16.1 though it didn't compare identical. More importantly, it runs. -- http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3535 --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
