https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30155
Alan Modra changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
Thanks for checking this.
>> The current binutils release 2.40 requires texinfo to build from source
>> because gas does not have .info files.
>
> I believe that it does:
>
> % tar tvf binutils-2.40.tar.xz | grep as.info
> -rw-rw-rw- root/root 1220923 2023-01-14 00:00
> binutils-2.40/gas/
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #26 from Alan Modra ---
Created attachment 14710
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14710&action=edit
Tidied patch
(In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #16)
> I have found a simpler reproducer for the proble
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29042
Andreas K. Huettel changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dilfridge at gentoo dot org
---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30036
Łukasz Stelmach changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target||2023-01-25 0:00
--- Comment #6 from
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #25 from Lev Veyde ---
Created attachment 14708
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14708&action=edit
This the output from addr2line-testing program against addr2line containing
Nick's patch
--
You are receivi
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #24 from Lev Veyde ---
So, as discussed it with Nick it's quite tricky situation.
Some of the affected symbols don't exist in any of the source code files, and
probably are generated using macro or some other construct, but a simi
Updates:
Labels: -restrict-view-commit
Comment #2 on issue 56195 by sheriffbot: binutils:fuzz_objdump_safe:
Null-dereference READ in bfd_getl32
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=56195#c2
This bug has been fixed. It has been opened to the public.
- Your friendly Sheri
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #23 from Lev Veyde ---
To avoid the possibility that the issue is caused by corrupted binary, I've
recompiled a different version of Linux kernel, 5.15.95, and ran tests against
it as well:
$ llvm-addr2line -fie vmlinux 0xfff
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #22 from Lev Veyde ---
Created attachment 14707
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14707&action=edit
This is the test against llvm-addr2line utility, to compare the outputs
--
You are receiving this mail beca
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #21 from Lev Veyde ---
It seems to also depend on a tool.
$ llvm-addr2line -v
llvm-addr2line
LLVM (http://llvm.org/):
LLVM version 14.0.6
Optimized build.
Default target: x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu
Host CPU: skylake
$ llvm-a
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #20 from Nick Clifton ---
OK, so the patch works, but there is at least one more problem. The source
locations are not always accurate. For example:
% addr2line -fiape vmlinux 0x81c00290
0x81c00290: __SCT__x86_
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #19 from Nick Clifton ---
The problem, I think, is that the vmlinux file contains DWARF CUs that
have both address ranges specified via the DW_AT_low_pc, DW_AT_high_pc
and/or DW_AT_ranges attributes *and* implicitly via the table i
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30152
Pete Lomax changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #18 from Lev Veyde ---
OK, compiling a custom version of addr2line with that patch, will update
regarding the results.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
--- Comment #17 from Nick Clifton ---
Created attachment 14705
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14705&action=edit
Proposed patch
Here is a proposed patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30155
--- Comment #1 from Alex Coplan ---
This is reproducible on both x86_64 and aarch64 targets, FWIW.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30155
Bug ID: 30155
Summary: ld: Segfault in _bfd_nearby_section with custom linker
scripts
Product: binutils
Version: 2.41 (HEAD)
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30150
Nick Clifton changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-02-22
Status|UNCONFIR
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30152
--- Comment #1 from Andreas Schwab ---
The actual check is:
number = section->sh_size / section->sh_entsize;
if (number * sizeof (Elf64_External_Sym) > section->sh_size + 1)
which fails since your symtab uses ELF32 symbols.
--
You are
21 matches
Mail list logo
