This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] PR gold/18695
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Senkevich <andrew dot n dot senkevich at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:52:04 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR gold/18695
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMXFM3t6BrUdey=bSO0XKVsSGuDs5uM9sEywyCGV1rm_hk9Tmw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOoPftkXp_47m4XD9iN0K7gbhGJ6XocBqcDCwVLWHue_cQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMXFM3twnE_6gex4G2euT7TOwEnqFQM+9GuzoFDCSyXJLD44PA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAMe9rOqy+7en3HkK0dN0T8_u+gTmLxcvLgLxpmcWgYsMfQEytA at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM, H.J. Lu <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Andrew Senkevich
> <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> Shouldn't there be generic address overflow checks which can be used
>>> by all targets?
>> As for me I am not sure it is really needed.
>> Here is new version of the patch.
> Please checkout users/hjl/gold branch. I moved has_overflow_signed,
> has_overflow_unsigned and has_overflow_bitfield from class
> Powerpc_relocate_functions to class Relocate_functions. Can you
> use them to check relocation overflow in x86_64.cc?
I added partial relocation overflow check in x86_64.cc on
users/hjl/gold branch. Please check it out.