This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: RFA: broken strip/objcopy


On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:58 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:41 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Kai Tietz <ktietz70@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> 2009/4/24 Kai Tietz <ktietz70@googlemail.com>:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> The current implementation of objcopy/strip in binutils has problems,
>>>> because for pe-coff targets. It assumes at the moment that it is an
>>>> i386 version. This leads to issues (especially on strip) for PE+
>>>> target that binaries are getting corrupted. So I think we have here to
>>>> move those target specific pe-coff parts into seperate files. (I
>>>> assume that possibly for othe pe-coff targets then i386 the same
>>>> problem exists). Of course we could use here target specific macros to
>>>> change internal structures, but for a mulilib version of them this
>>>> isn't suitable anymore.
>>>> So possible somebody of you have a strong opinion about how this issue
>>>> could be solved. I'll prepare a patch for it and post it soon.
>>>
>>> Ah, I found the major issue here
>>>
>>> 2009-04-17 ?H.J. Lu ?<hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>>>
>>> ? ? ? ?PR binutils/10074
>>>
>>> This patch made objcopy and strip for PE-Coff target 32-bit PE only
>>
>> I am trying to understand where the problem is. pe->pe_opthdr is
>> supposed to target independent. Why doesn't it work for w64?
>
> The problem is
>
> #ifdef COFF_PAGE_SIZE
> ? ?/* Clear D_PAGED if section alignment is smaller than
> ? ? ? COFF_PAGE_SIZE. ?*/
> ? if (pe_data (abfd)->pe_opthdr.SectionAlignment < COFF_PAGE_SIZE)
> ? ? abfd->flags &= ~D_PAGED;
> #endif
>
> in coff_compute_section_file_positions. For objcopy,
> pe_data (abfd)->pe_opthdr.SectionAlignment may not be set. To
> change PE parameters, we should call bfd_copy_private_bfd_data
> before changing PE parameters. This patch works for me on
> both w32 and w64.
>
>
> --
> H.J.
> --
> 2009-04-24 ?H.J. Lu ?<hongjiu.lu@intel.com>
>
> ? ? ? ?* objcopy.c (copy_object): Call bfd_copy_private_bfd_data
> ? ? ? ?before changing PE parameters.
>

We can't calll bfd_copy_private_bfd_data first. This patch only
copies pe_opthdr.



-- 
H.J.
--
bfd/

2009-04-24  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	* peXXigen.c (_bfd_XX_bfd_copy_private_bfd_data_common): Don't
	copy pe_opthdr.

binutils/

2009-04-24  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@intel.com>

	* objcopy.c (copy_object): Copy pe_opthdr before changing PE
	parameters.

Attachment: objcopy-pe-2.patch
Description: Text document


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]