https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #23 from Andrew Stubbs ---
Done: pr19020.
--
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.g
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #22 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #21)
> Looks like I'm just too late with my test results you broke the
> interleave feature. :-(
>
> The "interleave size" testcase in my patch demonstrates the prob
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #21 from Andrew Stubbs ---
Looks like I'm just too late with my test results you broke the interleave
feature. :-(
The "interleave size" testcase in my patch demonstrates the problem. Here's the
output:
$ xxd tmpdir/interleav
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #19 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=c68c16371639f360d1b110eacf4b1a28ddb5cf53
commit c68c16371639f360d1b110eacf4b1a2
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #18 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #17)
> I can check this tomorrow, but I don't think the output size is actually
> broken, as long as everything respects the input size when reading from
> input sections
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8634|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #17 from Andrew Stubbs ---
I can check this tomorrow, but I don't think the output size is actually
broken, as long as everything respects the input size when reading from input
sections. The "change something, change it back, chan
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #15 from Andrew Stubbs ---
It's just because the padding is added to the output section size when
--gap-fill is set in the following snippet:
objcopy.c, copy_object()
size = bfd_section_size (obfd, osections[i]);
gap
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #14 from H.J. Lu ---
For your original problem, why is your input section smaller
than your output section?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8632|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #12 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #11)
> My testcase was not really for reverse. I was trying to test for the buffer
> overrun, but as that's UB there's no direct way to do it reliably. Testing
> reverse
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Stubbs ---
My testcase was not really for reverse. I was trying to test for the buffer
overrun, but as that's UB there's no direct way to do it reliably. Testing
reverse was only meant to serve as an indicator that
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Andrew Stubbs from comment #9)
> No, it's the call to bfd_set_section_contents in which the UB occurs. You
> can see this with valgrind:
>
I got
[hjl@gnu-6 pr19005]$ cat x.S
.text
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--
You are rece
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #9 from Andrew Stubbs ---
No, it's the call to bfd_set_section_contents in which the UB occurs. You can
see this with valgrind:
==14966== Invalid read of size 1
==14966==at 0x50AA0A0: _IO_default_xsputn (genops.c:480)
==14966=
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8633|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #7 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 8633
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8633&action=edit
A simple patch
How about this simple patch? Does it work for you?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You a
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Stubbs ---
It's a negative test. No error *is* a failure.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-b
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|WAITING
--- Comment #5 from H.J. Lu ---
On
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8631|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #8629|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
Andrew Stubbs changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigne
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19005
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Stubbs ---
Created attachment 8629
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8629&action=edit
test case
I've attached a test suite patch that detects the issue.
--
You are receiving this mail because
24 matches
Mail list logo
