[Bug ld/30930] Broken BTI veneers: ld-2.41 links mame in a way which gets stuck on aarch64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30930 --- Comment #29 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=d3a8dfdef0797244d0f2f3a8ec5db8f1dcf1337b commit d3a8dfdef0797244d0f2f3a8ec5db8f1dcf1337b Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Mon Oct 16 13:18:13 2023 +0100 bfd: aarch64: Fix broken BTI stub PR30930 Input sections are grouped together that can use the same stub area (within reach) and these groups have a stable id. Stubs have a name generated from the stub group id and target symbol. When a relocation requires a stub with a name that already exists, the stub is reused instead of adding a new one. For an indirect branch stub another BTI stub may be inserted near the target to provide a BTI landing pad. The BTI stub can end up with the same stub group id and thus the same name as the indirect stub. This happens if the target symbol is within reach of the indirect branch stub. Then, due to the name collision, only a single stub was emmitted which branched to itself causing an infinite loop at runtime. A possible solution is to just name the BTI stubs differently, but since in the problematic case the indirect and BTI stub are in the same stub area, a better solution is to emit a single stub with a direct branch. The stub is still needed since the caller cannot reach the target directly and we also want a BTI landing pad in the stub in case other indirect stubs target the same symbol and thus need a BTI stub. In short we convert an indirect branch stub into a BTI stub when the target is within reach and has no BTI. It is a hassle to change the symbol of the stub so a BTI stub may end up with *_veneer instead of *_bti_veneer after the conversion, but this should not matter much. (Refactoring some of _bfd_aarch64_add_call_stub_entries would be useful but too much for this bug fix patch.) The same conversion to direct branch could be done even if the target did not need a BTI. The stub groups are fixed in the current logic so linking can fail if too many stubs are inserted and the section layout is changed too much, but this only happens in extreme cases that can be reasonably ignored. Because of this the target cannot go out of reach during stub insertion so the optimization is valid, but not implemented by this patch for the non-BTI case. Fixes bug 30930. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30957] aarch64: unnecessary bti veneer
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30957 --- Comment #2 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=fc48504c7abe8eb9d9723632b2d53504927f46ff commit fc48504c7abe8eb9d9723632b2d53504927f46ff Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Wed Oct 18 16:12:56 2023 +0100 bfd: aarch64: Avoid BTI stub for a PLT that has BTI We decide to emit BTI stubs based on the instruction at the target location. But PLT code is generated later than the stubs so we always read 0 which is not a valid BTI. Fix the logic to special case the PLT section: this is code the linker generates so we know when it will have BTI. This avoids BTI stubs in large executables where the PLTs have them already. An alternative is to never emit BTI stubs for PLTs, instead use BTI in the PLT if a library gets too big, however that may be more tricky given the ordering of PLT sizing and stub insertion. Related to bug 30957. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30957] aarch64: unnecessary bti veneer
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30957 --- Comment #1 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Szabolcs Nagy : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=98b94ebb3ffe715fddde762bb3ee7fd6d972f233 commit 98b94ebb3ffe715fddde762bb3ee7fd6d972f233 Author: Szabolcs Nagy Date: Fri Oct 13 17:51:15 2023 +0100 bfd: aarch64: Fix BTI stub optimization PR30957 The instruction was looked up in the wrong input file (file of branch source instead of branch target) when optimizing away BTI stubs in commit 5834f36d93cabf1a8bcc7dd7654141aed3d296bc bfd: aarch64: Optimize BTI stubs PR30076 This can cause adding BTI stubs when they are not necessary or removing them when they are (the latter is a correctness issue but it is very unlikely in practice). Fixes bug 30957. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/30930] Broken BTI veneers: ld-2.41 links mame in a way which gets stuck on aarch64
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30930 Nick Clifton changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #30 from Nick Clifton --- Patch applied. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug gas/31043] Poor error message for wrong register numbers
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31043 --- Comment #4 from Jan Beulich --- (In reply to Sam James from comment #3) > (In reply to Jan Beulich from comment #2) > > Hmm, both in 2.41 and in master I'm seeing "operand size mismatch", not > > "unsupported instruction". That's still not ideal, but imo quite a bit > > better. Yet I'm at a loss to explain why I would see a different error > > message than you do. > > Andrew got the same error message as me which is curious... Well, apologies, that was because of an embarrassing mistake of mine. Is https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-November/130465.html going to make this any better, do you think? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/31009] regression: assertion fail ../../bfd/merge.c:243
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31009 --- Comment #12 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Michael Matz : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=836654b1177ab305c36fe7319f08f0ad5d4fac1b commit 836654b1177ab305c36fe7319f08f0ad5d4fac1b Author: Michael Matz Date: Tue Nov 7 16:54:44 2023 +0100 ld: Avoid overflows in string merging as the bug report shows we had an overflow in the test if hash table resizing is needed. Reorder the expression to avoid that. There's still a bug somewhere in gracefully handling failure in resizing (e.g. out of memory), but this pushes the boundary for that occurring somewhen into the future and immediately helps the reporter. bfd/ PR ld/31009 * merge.c (NEEDS_RESIZE): New macro avoiding overflow. (sec_merge_maybe_resize): Use it. (sec_merge_hash_insert): Ditto. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug ld/31009] regression: assertion fail ../../bfd/merge.c:243
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31009 Michael Matz changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED --- Comment #13 from Michael Matz --- So, immediate problem fixed. That the error-paths that are supposed to recover from out-of-memory here (and invalidly were triggered) didn't quite work in recovery is something for another time. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
