[Bug gold/18695] [x86-64] Missing relocation overflow check

2016-02-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18695 --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- Overflow check doesn't work x32: [hjl@gnu-6 pr18695]$ cat x.S .hidden foo .comm pad,0x8ff0,8 .comm foo,8,8 .text .globl bar .type bar, @function bar:

[Bug binutils/19562] New: msp430 rrux instruction not displayed correctly by objdump

2016-02-03 Thread david.schultz at earthlink dot net
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19562 Bug ID: 19562 Summary: msp430 rrux instruction not displayed correctly by objdump Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Prio

[Bug gold/18695] [x86-64] Missing relocation overflow check

2016-02-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18695 --- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu --- On users/hjl/gold branch, I got [hjl@gnu-6 pr18695]$ cat x.S .hidden foo .comm pad,0x8ff0,8 .comm foo,8,8 .text .globl bar .type bar, @function bar:

[Bug gas/19561] New: wrong code generated for rrux instruction for msp430 target

2016-02-03 Thread david.schultz at earthlink dot net
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19561 Bug ID: 19561 Summary: wrong code generated for rrux instruction for msp430 target Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Pri

[Bug gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker

2016-02-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 H.J. Lu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker

2016-02-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 --- Comment #14 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The binutils-2_26-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=bab518b383819aea3a8d1725f7dfd906b7f34216 commit bab518b383819aea3

[Bug gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker

2016-02-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 --- Comment #13 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=0cb4071ef9e10f703220f5e731141bf438aca16e commit 0cb4071ef9e10f703220f5e731141bf

Re: Fix undefined shift overflow

2016-02-03 Thread Nick Clifton
Hi Michael, This idiom also appears in newlib and in various versions of GDB and associated codebases. I'm not sure how this maps to actual development repos. Well GDB shares a repo with the binutils, but newlib has its own repo. All forms I found are one of the following source text snippet

[Bug gold/18695] [x86-64] Missing relocation overflow check

2016-02-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18695 --- Comment #2 from H.J. Lu --- All relocations with 8-bit, 16-bit and 32-bit fields need to check for overflow. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-

[Bug gold/18695] [x86-64] Missing relocation overflow check

2016-02-03 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18695 --- Comment #1 from H.J. Lu --- A simpler testcase: [hjl@gnu-6 pr18591]$ cat x.S .hidden foo .comm pad,0x8000,8 .comm foo,8,8 .text .globl bar .type bar, @function bar: movqfo

[Bug gas/19520] [2.26 regression] R_386_GOT32X relocation breaks gcc bootstrap with non-gld/gold linker

2016-02-03 Thread ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19520 --- Comment #12 from Rainer Orth --- > --- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu --- > (In reply to Rainer Orth from comment #7) >> > --- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu --- >> > Please checkout users/hjl/pr19520/master branch. I added a >> > configure-time opti