From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 768AB3858414; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 12:17:28 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 768AB3858414 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1698927448; bh=WsZhTY7you0L+geS9aJnUANpuZXHJnGHKQgKOa7vtGg=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=oj38mebe3njXz69SqYQ/IIqbCHmpVvtbZEj9wICNBXrfFQ8JjbkCD5O5sXQLLmyns 9Uz+XrY4Moh5NiItmJMjxpFpEkjSnbqRw9wYofglIpLtdgXLBiKBC944+5L1v5pKNr +4Y5sGN9CA/eLext72GSAqqc9OO+NVbLi1ftKwc4= From: "mark at klomp dot org" To: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug libdw/30980] offline.c:53: dwfl_offline_section_address: Assertion `mod->e_type == ET_REL' failed. Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 12:17:27 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: elfutils X-Bugzilla-Component: libdw X-Bugzilla-Version: unspecified X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: mark at klomp dot org X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: FIXED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D30980 --- Comment #6 from Mark Wielaard --- Thanks, that seems to be the correct thing to do here. Note that there are a couple more asserts on this code path. In particular = in __libdwfl_find_elf_build_id there is what apparently is the root of the confusion here: // MOD->E_TYPE is zero here. assert (ehdr->e_type !=3D ET_REL || mod !=3D NULL); Which passes because mod !=3D NULL. But probably should have been a red fla= g. This is my fault, I refactored this code and kept these asserts without ful= ly understanding why there were (not) needed. We should go over all asserts in the library code and rewrite/remove them. = It is never a good thing to trigger an abort in library code. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=