* [patch] coff-i386, guard against null
@ 2007-07-26 0:54 msnyder
2007-07-26 2:20 ` H.J. Lu
2007-07-26 13:08 ` Alan Modra
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: msnyder @ 2007-07-26 0:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: binutils
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 90 bytes --]
Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null.
If it's null here, it'll fail.
[-- Attachment #2: howto.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 821 bytes --]
2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com>
* coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null.
Index: coff-i386.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/coff-i386.c,v
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -p -r1.26 coff-i386.c
*** coff-i386.c 3 Jul 2007 14:26:39 -0000 1.26
--- coff-i386.c 26 Jul 2007 00:18:04 -0000
*************** coff_i386_rtype_to_howto (abfd, sec, rel
*** 518,524 ****
*addendp -= pe_data(sec->output_section->owner)->pe_opthdr.ImageBase;
}
! if (rel->r_type == R_SECREL32)
{
bfd_vma osect_vma;
--- 518,524 ----
*addendp -= pe_data(sec->output_section->owner)->pe_opthdr.ImageBase;
}
! if (rel->r_type == R_SECREL32 && sym != NULL)
{
bfd_vma osect_vma;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 0:54 [patch] coff-i386, guard against null msnyder @ 2007-07-26 2:20 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 12:34 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2007-07-26 13:08 ` Alan Modra 1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 2:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: msnyder; +Cc: binutils On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. > If it's null here, it'll fail. > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). H.J. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 2:20 ` H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 12:34 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2007-07-26 13:46 ` H.J. Lu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2007-07-26 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: msnyder, binutils On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. > > If it's null here, it'll fail. > > > > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> > > > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. > > > > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). BFD_ASSERT returns, though. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 12:34 ` Daniel Jacobowitz @ 2007-07-26 13:46 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 18:54 ` msnyder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: msnyder, binutils On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. > > > If it's null here, it'll fail. > > > > > > > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> > > > > > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. > > > > > > > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). > > BFD_ASSERT returns, though. I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. H.J. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 13:46 ` H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 18:54 ` msnyder 2007-07-26 20:01 ` H.J. Lu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: msnyder @ 2007-07-26 18:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: msnyder, binutils > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: >> > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. >> > > If it's null here, it'll fail. >> > > >> > >> > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> >> > > >> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. >> > > >> > >> > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). >> >> BFD_ASSERT returns, though. > > I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than > silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. But it doesn't fix the problem that I set out to fix. If it returns, we'll still crash. H.J., the change I submitted is consistant with existing code in this module. There are six local uses of "if (x != NULL)", and only one local use of BFD_ASSERT. I don't mind if you want to add a BFD_ASSERT in addition, but why not let my change go in? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 18:54 ` msnyder @ 2007-07-26 20:01 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 23:52 ` msnyder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: msnyder; +Cc: binutils On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:52:07AM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > >> > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. > >> > > If it's null here, it'll fail. > >> > > > >> > > >> > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> > >> > > > >> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. > >> > > > >> > > >> > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). > >> > >> BFD_ASSERT returns, though. > > > > I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than > > silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. > > But it doesn't fix the problem that I set out to fix. > If it returns, we'll still crash. > > H.J., the change I submitted is consistant with existing code > in this module. There are six local uses of "if (x != NULL)", > and only one local use of BFD_ASSERT. I don't mind if you want > to add a BFD_ASSERT in addition, but why not let my change go in? OK with BFD_ASSERT. H.J. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 20:01 ` H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 23:52 ` msnyder 2007-07-27 1:04 ` H.J. Lu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: msnyder @ 2007-07-26 23:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: msnyder, binutils > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:52:07AM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: >> >> > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. >> >> > > If it's null here, it'll fail. >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> >> >> > > >> >> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). >> >> >> >> BFD_ASSERT returns, though. >> > >> > I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than >> > silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. >> >> But it doesn't fix the problem that I set out to fix. >> If it returns, we'll still crash. >> >> H.J., the change I submitted is consistant with existing code >> in this module. There are six local uses of "if (x != NULL)", >> and only one local use of BFD_ASSERT. I don't mind if you want >> to add a BFD_ASSERT in addition, but why not let my change go in? > > OK with BFD_ASSERT. Sorry, I don't understand your reply. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 23:52 ` msnyder @ 2007-07-27 1:04 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-27 1:42 ` msnyder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread From: H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-27 1:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: msnyder; +Cc: binutils On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 04:24:22PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:52:07AM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > >> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > >> >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > >> >> > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. > >> >> > > If it's null here, it'll fail. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> > >> >> > > > >> >> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). > >> >> > >> >> BFD_ASSERT returns, though. > >> > > >> > I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than > >> > silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. > >> > >> But it doesn't fix the problem that I set out to fix. > >> If it returns, we'll still crash. > >> > >> H.J., the change I submitted is consistant with existing code > >> in this module. There are six local uses of "if (x != NULL)", > >> and only one local use of BFD_ASSERT. I don't mind if you want > >> to add a BFD_ASSERT in addition, but why not let my change go in? > > > > OK with BFD_ASSERT. > > Sorry, I don't understand your reply. Your change is OK if you also add a BFD_ASSERT so that we will know something is wrong. Thanks. H.J. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-27 1:04 ` H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-27 1:42 ` msnyder 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: msnyder @ 2007-07-27 1:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: H.J. Lu; +Cc: msnyder, binutils > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 04:24:22PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 11:52:07AM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: >> >> > On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 07:41:39AM -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 07:18:55PM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> >> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net >> wrote: >> >> >> > > Other code in this function checks to see if sym is null. >> >> >> > > If it's null here, it'll fail. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder <msnyder@access-company.com> >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (sym != NULL). >> >> >> >> >> >> BFD_ASSERT returns, though. >> >> > >> >> > I'd like to know when this condition happens. Crash is better than >> >> > silent return. That is how BFD_ASSERT is used other places. >> >> >> >> But it doesn't fix the problem that I set out to fix. >> >> If it returns, we'll still crash. >> >> >> >> H.J., the change I submitted is consistant with existing code >> >> in this module. There are six local uses of "if (x != NULL)", >> >> and only one local use of BFD_ASSERT. I don't mind if you want >> >> to add a BFD_ASSERT in addition, but why not let my change go in? >> > >> > OK with BFD_ASSERT. >> >> Sorry, I don't understand your reply. > > Your change is OK if you also add a BFD_ASSERT so that we will > know something is wrong. OK, committed. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [patch] coff-i386, guard against null 2007-07-26 0:54 [patch] coff-i386, guard against null msnyder 2007-07-26 2:20 ` H.J. Lu @ 2007-07-26 13:08 ` Alan Modra 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Alan Modra @ 2007-07-26 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: msnyder; +Cc: binutils On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:21:13PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > * coff-i386.c (coff_i386_rtype_to_howto): Guard against null. OK. -- Alan Modra Australia Development Lab, IBM ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-07-27 1:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-07-26 0:54 [patch] coff-i386, guard against null msnyder 2007-07-26 2:20 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 12:34 ` Daniel Jacobowitz 2007-07-26 13:46 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 18:54 ` msnyder 2007-07-26 20:01 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-26 23:52 ` msnyder 2007-07-27 1:04 ` H.J. Lu 2007-07-27 1:42 ` msnyder 2007-07-26 13:08 ` Alan Modra
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).