From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11740 invoked by alias); 27 Jul 2007 03:06:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 11731 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Jul 2007 03:06:31 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (HELO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net) (204.127.192.82) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:06:29 +0000 Received: from lucon.org ([24.6.230.138]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20070727030627m1200fnhmne>; Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:06:27 +0000 Received: by lucon.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id 52427F7F60; Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:06:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:46:00 -0000 From: "H.J. Lu" To: msnyder@sonic.net Cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch] elf32-i386.c, check for null Message-ID: <20070727030627.GA13324@lucon.org> References: <22765.12.7.175.2.1185413008.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> <20070726022013.GB29523@lucon.org> <4869.12.7.175.2.1185500521.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4869.12.7.175.2.1185500521.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.14 (2007-02-12) Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00485.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 06:42:01PM -0700, msnyder@sonic.net wrote: > > > > > I prefer BFD_ASSERT (h != NULL) and R_386_GNU_VTINHERIT has the same > > issue. > > OK -- how's this? > > 2007-07-25 Michael Snyder > > * elf32-i386.c (elf_i386_check_relocs): Check for null pointer. > > Index: elf32-i386.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/bfd/elf32-i386.c,v > retrieving revision 1.174 > diff -p -r1.174 elf32-i386.c > *** elf32-i386.c 3 Jul 2007 14:26:41 -0000 1.174 > --- elf32-i386.c 27 Jul 2007 01:40:47 -0000 > *************** elf_i386_check_relocs (bfd *abfd, > *** 1270,1284 **** > /* This relocation describes the C++ object vtable hierarchy. > Reconstruct it for later use during GC. */ > case R_386_GNU_VTINHERIT: > ! if (!bfd_elf_gc_record_vtinherit (abfd, sec, h, rel->r_offset)) > ! return FALSE; > break; > > /* This relocation describes which C++ vtable entries are actually > used. Record for later use during GC. */ > case R_386_GNU_VTENTRY: > ! if (!bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry (abfd, sec, h, rel->r_offset)) > ! return FALSE; > break; > > default: > --- 1270,1288 ---- > /* This relocation describes the C++ object vtable hierarchy. > Reconstruct it for later use during GC. */ > case R_386_GNU_VTINHERIT: > ! BFD_ASSERT (h != NULL); > ! if (h != NULL) > ! if (!bfd_elf_gc_record_vtinherit (abfd, sec, h, rel->r_offset)) > ! return FALSE; > break; > > /* This relocation describes which C++ vtable entries are actually > used. Record for later use during GC. */ > case R_386_GNU_VTENTRY: > ! BFD_ASSERT (h != NULL); > ! if (h != NULL) > ! if (!bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry (abfd, sec, h, rel->r_offset)) > ! return FALSE; > break; > It is OK. Can you use if (h != NULL && !bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry (abfd, sec, h, rel->r_offset)) return FALSE; 2 ifs look odd to me. But it is OK if you don't want to change. Thanks. H.J.