https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27171
Kilian Kegel changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||https://github.com/KilianKe
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27171
--- Comment #2 from Kilian Kegel ---
Created attachment 13112
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13112&action=edit
LINK.EXE commented disassembly
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27171
--- Comment #1 from Kilian Kegel ---
Created attachment 13111
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13111&action=edit
LD commented disassembly
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27171
Bug ID: 27171
Summary: R_X86_64_PC32 static address relocation
Product: binutils
Version: 2.34
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: ld
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26945
Siddhesh Poyarekar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNE
Comment #2 on issue 27734 by amo...@gmail.com: binutils:fuzz_readelf: Abrt with
empty stacktrace
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/oss-fuzz/issues/detail?id=27734#c2
If I understand correctly that the fuzzers run multiple inputs through a given
fuzzer image, then this patch should fix these random cr
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #8 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #7)
> Applied your R_386_PLT32 patch.
>
> # of unexpected failures6
>
> make -C Debug check-ld RUNTESTFLAGS=ld-shared/shared.exp # passed for me.
>
You need to
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #7 from Fangrui Song ---
Applied your R_386_PLT32 patch.
# of unexpected failures6
make -C Debug check-ld RUNTESTFLAGS=ld-shared/shared.exp # passed for me.
ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pr20515.d is an expected failure due to no
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu ---
Created attachment 13109
--> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13109&action=edit
A patch to generate R_386_PLT32
I tried this patch when I made:
commit bd7ab16b4537788ad53521c45469a1bdae84ad4
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #5 from Fangrui Song ---
Sorry
# a.s
.globl main
main:
call puts
# b.s
.globl main
main:
call puts@plt
gcc -m32 -no-pie a.s -o a -fuse-ld=bfd
gcc -m32 -no-pie b.s -o b -fuse-ld=bfd
do not have instruction difference.
--
Yo
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #4 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #3)
> (In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #2)
> > (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > > Since i386 doesn't have IP-relative addressing, non-PIC PLT is different
>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #3 from H.J. Lu ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #2)
> (In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> > Since i386 doesn't have IP-relative addressing, non-PIC PLT is different
> > from PIC PLT. Using R_386_PLT32 for "call/jmp
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
--- Comment #2 from Fangrui Song ---
(In reply to H.J. Lu from comment #1)
> Since i386 doesn't have IP-relative addressing, non-PIC PLT is different
> from PIC PLT. Using R_386_PLT32 for "call/jmp foo" isn't appreciate.
I know that this is
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27169
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #1 f
14 matches
Mail list logo
