[Bug ld/22269] Undefined weak symbols isn't resolved to 0 in static PIE

2017-10-10 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22269 --- Comment #11 from Alan Modra --- > If there is a program bug: > ... > may lead to undesired behavior. Quite so. > -z dynamic-undefined-weak applies if there is a DT_NEEDED entry which > may provide definition for undefined weak reference

[Bug ld/22269] Undefined weak symbols isn't resolved to 0 in static PIE

2017-10-10 Thread hjl.tools at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22269 --- Comment #10 from H.J. Lu --- (In reply to Alan Modra from comment #9) > > Since call is PC relative, this doesn't branch to address 0. > > I don't see why this matters. A symbol that resolves to zero without > dynamic relocs in a PIE or

[Bug ld/22269] Undefined weak symbols isn't resolved to 0 in static PIE

2017-10-10 Thread amodra at gmail dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22269 --- Comment #9 from Alan Modra --- > Since call is PC relative, this doesn't branch to address 0. I don't see why this matters. A symbol that resolves to zero without dynamic relocs in a PIE or shared lib results in an address of zero. If t

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread tromey at sourceware dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #11 from Tom Tromey --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #10) > dwarf-mode.el:186:6:Warning: set-keymap-parent called with 1 argument, but > requires 2 > > I am not an emacs expert, but maybe this could be a problem ?

[Bug ld/21402] i386: indirect5 failures

2017-10-10 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21402 --- Comment #11 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Renlin Li : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=6c699715f68be7d8c468e965fbefce997f7ed937 commit 6c699715f68be7d8c468e965fbefc

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #10 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Tom, > Thread starts here: > > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2017-10/msg00082.html All the changes look fine to me, apart from one. Patch 2/5 has: +(defvar dwarf-mode-map + (let ((map (make-s

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread tromey at sourceware dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #9 from Tom Tromey --- Thread starts here: https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2017-10/msg00082.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ bug-

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #8 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Tom, > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 > I will look, but I'd appreciate it if you could look at the dwarf-mode.el > patches that I also posted to the list. Alan had already appr

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread tromey at sourceware dot org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #7 from Tom Tromey --- (In reply to Nick Clifton from comment #6) > Hi Tom, > > OK, well your patch is fine, so I have checked that in. I still think > that we need to improve the documentation however. Do you have any > sugge

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread nickc at redhat dot com
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #6 from Nick Clifton --- Hi Tom, OK, well your patch is fine, so I have checked that in. I still think that we need to improve the documentation however. Do you have any suggestions ? Cheers Nick -- You are receiving this

[Bug binutils/22249] objdump --dwarf-start can be very slow

2017-10-10 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22249 --- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org --- The master branch has been updated by Nick Clifton : https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;h=ae7e78255666733d238e676a0bab14986a1483dd commit ae7e78255666733d238e676a0ba

Changes done in binutils revision

2017-10-10 Thread Parul Chahar
Hi, I had done porting using binutils 2.26. Now I want to move to binutils 2.27. Can someone help me, how can I check what all changes are done from 2.26 to 2.27. I do not know how to use git. I want to know what all changes are done for x86-64. Thanks, Parul __