This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH, MIPS] When calculating a relocation using an undefined weak symbol don't check for overflow.
- From: Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Bennett <Andrew dot Bennett at imgtec dot com>
- Cc: Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>, "Tristan Gingold (gingold at adacore dot com)" <gingold at adacore dot com>, "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 22:02:58 +1030
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, MIPS] When calculating a relocation using an undefined weak symbol don't check for overflow.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <0DA23CC379F5F945ACB41CF394B9827720F35D28 at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org> <87fvczuhxz dot fsf at googlemail dot com> <0DA23CC379F5F945ACB41CF394B9827720F3A4EE at LEMAIL01 dot le dot imgtec dot org>
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 01:40:03PM +0000, Andrew Bennett wrote:
> > > bfd/
> > > * elfxx-mips.c (mips_elf_calculate_relocation): Only check for overflow
> > > on non-weak undefined symbols.
> > >
> > > ld/testsuite/
> > > * ld-mips-elf/mips-elf.exp: Add in undefined weak overflow tests for
> > > o32, n32 and n64.
> > > * ld-mips-elf/undefweak-overflow.s: New test.
> > > * ld-mips-elf/undefweak-overflow.d: New test.
> > > * ld-mips-elf/undefweak-overflow-n64.d: New test.
> > > * ld-mips-elf/undefweak-overflow-n64.d: New test.
> >
> > OK, thanks, and sorry for the slow reply.
>
> That's ok. I have now committed the patch.
mipsisa32el-linux +FAIL: undefined weak symbol overflow (n32)
mipsisa32el-linux +FAIL: undefined weak symbol overflow (n64)
tx39-elf +FAIL: undefined weak symbol overflow
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM