From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Cc: Chenghua Xu <paul.hua.gm@gmail.com>, Binutils <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: non-conformant ELF symbol table on MIPS?
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 08:13:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b5cd724f-449e-8e8c-6bae-e93309b1d17c@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2307271717100.10240@angie.orcam.me.uk>
On 27.07.2023 21:28, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>> extending the gas elf/common3.s testcase (in the context of trying to fix
>> PR gas/30688) to
>>
>> .comm foobar,30,4
>> .comm buf1, 5-1, 8
>> .comm buf2, 4, 9-1
>> .lcomm lbuf, 9-1
>>
>> I notice a violation of the ELF spec on most (all?) MIPS targets I would
>> routinely test for common code changes: "lbuf" is emitted last in the
>> symbol table. The spec is quite clear: "In each symbol table, all
>> symbols with STB_LOCAL binding precede the weak and global symbols." I
>> guess I want/need to xfail that test for mips*-*-* for the time being,
>> but it would be nice if you could shed some light on this behavior.
>
> Which specific MIPS target is it?
Among the 9 I test, it's mips-unknown-elf, mipsisa32r2el-unknown-elf,
mips-sgi-irix6, and mipstx39-unknown-elf.
> There are two kinds of MIPS targets, ones that use the older IRIX symbol
> sorting rules and ones that use the newer "traditional" symbol sorting
> rules. The IRIX symbol sorting rules mandate that section symbols precede
> all other symbols, see e.g. bfd/elf32-mips.c:mips_elf_sym_is_global.
> Mind that SGI was an early adopter of the ELF standard and things weren't
> as settled as they are nowadays, hence e.g. the odd solution for composed
> relocations with the n64 psABI (later n32 uses standard ELF gABI ones) and
> other peculiarities here and there.
>
> Determining whether a MIPS target uses the IRIX emulation is complex, see
> e.g. how binutils/testsuite/binutils-all/mips/mips.exp sets `irixemul'.
> If you provide me with test case details (input and output), then I may be
> able to give you further advice,
I've provided you the input (see context above), and you'll be able to
generate the object file from it yourself. But I don't see what this
would bring, when you already indicate that this is "expected" behavior.
> but otherwise you may want to mark the
> test case with `notarget' or suchlike rather than `xfail', because that's
> not a bug with the backend that the symbol ordering varies.
I'm okay making mips*-*-irix* "notarget", but I don't view this as
appropriate for e.g. mips*-unknown-elf. Instead I would prefer leaving
further tweaking (if so needed) to you. The immediate goal is to get a
regression fix (with an accompanying extension to a testcase) in
quickly, such that hopefully Nick would still be able to pick it up for
2.41 (as in principle it affects most if not all targets).
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-28 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-27 14:27 Jan Beulich
2023-07-27 19:04 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2023-07-27 19:39 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2023-07-28 6:16 ` Jan Beulich
2023-07-28 17:11 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2023-07-28 23:58 ` Alan Modra
2023-07-27 19:28 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2023-07-28 6:13 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2023-07-28 7:18 ` Jan Beulich
2023-07-28 6:18 ` Jan Beulich
2023-07-28 6:56 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b5cd724f-449e-8e8c-6bae-e93309b1d17c@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=macro@orcam.me.uk \
--cc=paul.hua.gm@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).