[Bug binutils/17412] disassembe uncorrect for opcode (C705 AC044A00 3CEA4200)
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17412 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to figozhu from comment #0) > Created attachment 7794 [details] > target exe(win32) > > In IDA/other DisAsm tools, following opocode can process correctly > ::00438FE5:: C705 AC044A00 3CEA4200 MOV DWORD PTR [4A04AC],42EA3C > > but objdump parse it to 2 asm line: > 438fe5: c7 05 ac 04 4a 00 3cmovl $0x42ea3c,0x4a04ac > 438fec: ea 42 00 This is AT&T syntax. With -Mintel, I got c7 05 ac 04 4a 00 3c ea 42 00 movDWORD PTR ds:0x4a04ac,0x42ea3c -- 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/17415] New: Overflow in relocation (R_AARCH64_TLSLE_ADD_TPREL_HI12) silently ignored
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17415 Bug ID: 17415 Summary: Overflow in relocation (R_AARCH64_TLSLE_ADD_TPREL_HI12) silently ignored Product: binutils Version: unspecified Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: binutils Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org Reporter: shenhan at google dot com Created attachment 7795 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=7795&action=edit test case Hi while developing gold for aarch64, we found a case (attached) that overflows relocation R_AARCH64_TLSLE_ADD_TPREL_HI12, because the offset from TP (thread pointer) is too large (bigger than 2^24). Instead of generating an error, the bfd aarch64 linker silently truncates the higher bits of offset, leading to a run time error. To reproduce, just compile - gcc -O0 case.c ./a.out The exit value is 7, but the correct value should be 0. The relocations to compute tp-offset of "i" is at 400600 and 400604, which is apparently not "10". 4005fc: d53bd040mrs x0, tpidr_el0 400600: 9140add x0, x0, #0x0, lsl #12 400604: 91004000add x0, x0, #0x10 400608: b940ldr w0, [x0] 40060c: 910043ffadd sp, sp, #0x10 400610: d65f03c0ret This was observed on trunk as well as 2.24. -- 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/16722] arm: literal pool syntax for vldr is broken
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16722 Gregory Fong changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gregory.0xf0 at gmail dot com --- Comment #4 from Gregory Fong --- Could this be backported to binutils-2_24-branch? -- 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/17068] --as-needed and --start-group/--end-group interact in strange ways if .so files are mentioned in --start-group/--end-group
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17068 Gregory Fong changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gregory.0xf0 at gmail dot com --- Comment #6 from Gregory Fong --- Could this be backported to binutils-2_24-branch? -- 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
