[Bug ld/21961] --orphan-handling=error fails in 2.29 because of changed .group handling
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21961 --- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Andrew Burgess : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=5b5f4e6f8cd250e07ec98278f7223e57b3d3bb0c commit 5b5f4e6f8cd250e07ec98278f7223e57b3d3bb0c Author: Andrew Burgess Date: Thu Aug 17 11:29:04 2017 +0100 ld: Early detection of orphans we know will be discarded When processing an orphan section we first call lang_place_orphans, this function handles a few sections for which the behaviour is known COMMON sections, or sections marked as SEC_EXCLUDE. Any orphans that are not handled in lang_place_orphans are passed on to ldlang_place_orphan, this is where we decide where to put the orphan, and then call lang_add_section to perform the actual orphan placement. We previously had a larger set of checks at the start of the function lang_add_section to discard some sections that we _knew_ should not be added into the output file, this was where .group sections (in a final link) and .debug* sections (with --strip-debug) were dropped. The problem with dropping these sections at the lang_add_section stage is that a user might also be using --orphan-handling=error to prevent orphans. If they are then they should not be get errors about sections that we know will be discarded, and which are not mentioned in the linker script. The solution proposed in this patch is to move the "will this section be discarded" check into a separate function, and use this in lang_place_orphans to have the early discard phase discard sections that we know should not be included in the output file. ld/ChangeLog: PR 21961 * ldlang.c (lang_discard_section_p): New function. (lang_add_section): Checks moved out into new function, which is now called. (lang_place_orphans): Call lang_discard_section_p instead of duplicating some of the checks from lang_add_section. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.d: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.ld: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.s: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-12.d: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-12.s: New 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/21961] --orphan-handling=error fails in 2.29 because of changed .group handling
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21961 --- Comment #6 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_29-branch branch has been updated by Andrew Burgess : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=dbb8f8b80b108dd60ab51c3e482c9c0865408b68 commit dbb8f8b80b108dd60ab51c3e482c9c0865408b68 Author: Andrew Burgess Date: Thu Aug 17 11:29:04 2017 +0100 ld: Early detection of orphans we know will be discarded When processing an orphan section we first call lang_place_orphans, this function handles a few sections for which the behaviour is known COMMON sections, or sections marked as SEC_EXCLUDE. Any orphans that are not handled in lang_place_orphans are passed on to ldlang_place_orphan, this is where we decide where to put the orphan, and then call lang_add_section to perform the actual orphan placement. We previously had a larger set of checks at the start of the function lang_add_section to discard some sections that we _knew_ should not be added into the output file, this was where .group sections (in a final link) and .debug* sections (with --strip-debug) were dropped. The problem with dropping these sections at the lang_add_section stage is that a user might also be using --orphan-handling=error to prevent orphans. If they are then they should not be get errors about sections that we know will be discarded, and which are not mentioned in the linker script. The solution proposed in this patch is to move the "will this section be discarded" check into a separate function, and use this in lang_place_orphans to have the early discard phase discard sections that we know should not be included in the output file. ld/ChangeLog: PR 21961 * ldlang.c (lang_discard_section_p): New function. (lang_add_section): Checks moved out into new function, which is now called. (lang_place_orphans): Call lang_discard_section_p instead of duplicating some of the checks from lang_add_section. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.d: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.ld: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-11.s: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-12.d: New file. * testsuite/ld-elf/orphan-12.s: New 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/22001] -z nocopyreloc doesn't work right
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22001 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=7073b5b9edc9e06974bd733b7e4b3845d6d6f690 commit 7073b5b9edc9e06974bd733b7e4b3845d6d6f690 Author: H.J. Lu Date: Thu Aug 24 06:34:19 2017 -0700 x86-64: Check relocations with -z nocopyreloc On x86-64, when -z nocopyreloc is used to build executable, relocations may overflow at run-time or may not be resolved without PIC. This patch checks these conditions and issues an error with suggestion for -fPIC. bfd/ PR ld/22001 * elf64-x86-64.c (elf_x86_64_relocate_section): Check for R_X86_64_PC32 relocation run-time overflow and unresolvable R_X86_64_32S relocation with -z nocopyreloc. ld/ PR ld/22001 * testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Run -z nocopyreloc tests. * testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pr22001-1a.c: New file. * ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pr22001-1b.c: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pr22001-1c.S: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pr22001-1a.c: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pr22001-1a.err: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pr22001-1b.c: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pr22001-1b.err: Likewise. * ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pr22001-1c.c: Likewise. -- 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/22001] -z nocopyreloc doesn't work right
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22001 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |2.30 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- Fixed for 2.30. -- 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/21961] --orphan-handling=error fails in 2.29 because of changed .group handling
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21961 --- Comment #7 from Andrew Burgess --- I don't have permission to change the status of this bug to closed: fixed, but for what it's worth I believe that is now the case. If anyone thinks there are still issues in this area, leave a comment (and details) and I'll continue to investigate. -- 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/21994] Hang in process_version_sections with ent.vd_next = 0 and aux.vda_next = 0
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21994 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2017-08-25 CC||amodra at gmail dot com Assignee|unassigned at sourceware dot org |amodra at gmail dot com Ever confirmed|0 |1 -- 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/21961] --orphan-handling=error fails in 2.29 because of changed .group handling
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21961 Alan Modra changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Alan Modra --- Fixed -- 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/21994] Hang in process_version_sections with ent.vd_next = 0 and aux.vda_next = 0
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21994 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Alan Modra : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=1445030f313d9b251a6a27c8bdf52197520396e2 commit 1445030f313d9b251a6a27c8bdf52197520396e2 Author: Alan Modra Date: Fri Aug 25 11:41:06 2017 +0930 PR21994, readelf looping on verdefs PR 21994 * readelf.c (process_version_sections ): Check vd_aux and vda_next for sanity. Delete "end". Correct overflow checks. (process_version_sections ): Correct overflow check. Don't report invalid vna_next on overflow. Do report invalid vna_next on size less than aux info. -- 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
