From: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>,
Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>
Subject: Re: x86_64 / i686 no-PIE failures
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 09:28:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2TbQZJpOcJEHK0o@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a6572ny0.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
The 11/04/2022 08:12, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote:
> * Joseph Myers:
>
> > Now that the uchar.h failures with mainline GCC are fixed, other failures
> > show up for x86_64 / i686 no-PIE with mainline GCC and binutils (I don't
> > know how long these have been there):
> >
> > /scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/install/compilers/x86_64-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/x86_64-glibc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/../../../../x86_64-glibc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: /scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/build/glibcs/x86_64-linux-gnu-no-pie/glibc/elf/ifuncmain1.o: non-canonical reference to canonical protected function `foo_protected' in /scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/build/glibcs/x86_64-linux-gnu-no-pie/glibc/elf/ifuncmod1.so
> > /scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/install/compilers/x86_64-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/x86_64-glibc-linux-gnu/13.0.0/../../../../x86_64-glibc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: failed to set dynamic section sizes: bad value
> > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> > ../Rules:238: recipe for target '/scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/build/glibcs/x86_64-linux-gnu-no-pie/glibc/elf/ifuncmain1' failed
> > make[3]: *** [/scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/build/glibcs/x86_64-linux-gnu-no-pie/glibc/elf/ifuncmain1] Error 1
> > make[3]: Leaving directory '/scratch/jmyers/glibc-bot/src/glibc/elf'
>
> H.J.,
>
> this test no longer seems valid with current binutils (or current
> binutils is broken).
>
> ifuncmain1.o has X86_64_32S and X86_64_PLT32 relocations for
> foo_protected, so the main program must contain a PLT stub for
> foo_protected. Apparently, ld no longer produces such binaries.
>
> What should we do about this?
aarch64 has the same issue since
binutils commit 90b7a5df152a64d2bea20beb438e8b81049a5c30
aarch64: Disallow copy relocations on protected data
which should be in the binutils 2.39 release
ld.lld rejects such usage too, i think the plan was to not
support extern protected symbol refs with canonical address
moved to the main exe.
so the tests should be changed, but i'm not sure what's
the best approach (completely dropping protected or just
ensure the address is not taken in no-pie case).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-04 9:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-17 22:27 Joseph Myers
2022-11-04 7:12 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-04 9:28 ` Szabolcs Nagy [this message]
2022-11-04 16:48 ` H.J. Lu
2022-11-04 16:52 ` Florian Weimer
2022-11-04 17:28 ` Fangrui Song
2022-11-04 17:47 ` Florian Weimer
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=Y2TbQZJpOcJEHK0o@arm.com \
--to=szabolcs.nagy@arm.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=maskray@google.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).