bug-binutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug ld/19319] Regression: ld.bfd: 2.25.90.20151125 assertion fail ../..


From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
Subject: [Bug ld/19319] Regression: ld.bfd: 2.25.90.20151125 assertion fail ../../bfd/elf32-i386.c:5297
Date: Sat, 05 Dec 2015 16:33:52 +0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19319

--- Comment #22 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot 
gnu.org> ---
The binutils-2_26-branch branch has been updated by H.J. Lu
<address@hidden>:

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=97753ee528c1c01e1cf0c7b41b344713103b2631

commit 97753ee528c1c01e1cf0c7b41b344713103b2631
Author: H.J. Lu <address@hidden>
Date:   Tue Dec 1 14:45:51 2015 -0800

    Properly check symbol defined by assignment in linker script

    Symbol defined by a linker assignment may have type bfd_link_hash_new
    or bfd_link_hash_undefined.  And h->def_regular is always set.
    elf_i386_convert_load and elf_x86_64_convert_load should check
    h->def_regular as well as bfd_link_hash_undefined and bfd_link_hash_new
    to see if a symbol is defined by a linker script.

    bfd/

        PR ld/19319
        * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_convert_load): Check h->def_regular
        instead of bfd_link_hash_new.
        * elf64-x86-64.c (elf_x86_64_convert_load): Likewise.  Skip
        relocation overflow for bfd_link_hash_undefined and
        bfd_link_hash_new if h->def_regular is set.

    ld/testsuite/

        PR ld/19319
        * ld-i386/i386.exp: Run pr19319 test.
        * ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp: Likewise.
        * ld-i386/pr19319.dd: New file.
        * ld-i386/pr19319a.S: Likewise.
        * ld-i386/pr19319b.S: Likewise.
        * ld-x86-64/pr19319.dd: Likewise.
        * ld-x86-64/pr19319a.S: Likewise.
        * ld-x86-64/pr19319b.S: Likewise.

    (cherry picked from commit ead3d5427a2df5e33316d4ad045510c1d2078c2a)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]