For a reference to a local symbol, ld.bfd and gold error if the symbol
is defined in a discarded section but accept it if the symbol is
undefined. This inconsistent behavior seems unnecessary for us (it
probably makes sense for them as they differentiate local/global
symbols, the error would mean more code).
Catch such errors. Symbol index 0 may be used by marker relocations,
e.g. R_*_NONE R_ARM_V4BX. Don't error on them.
The difference from D61563 (which caused msan failure) is we don't call
Sym.computeBinding() on local symbols - VersionId is uninitialized.
llvm-svn: 361213
This reverts commit r361144. It causes a use-of-uninitialized-value in
maybeReportUndefined at llvm/tools/lld/ELF/Relocations.cpp:682, as
detected by MemorySanitizer when local-undefined-symbol.s test is run.
llvm-svn: 361162
For a reference to a local symbol, ld.bfd and gold error if the symbol
is defined in a discarded section but accept it if the symbol is
undefined. This inconsistent behavior seems unnecessary for us (it
probably makes sense for them as they differentiate local/global
symbols, the error would mean more code).
Weaken the condition to getSymbol(Config->IsMips64EL) == 0 to catch such
errors. The symbol index can be 0 (e.g. R_*_NONE R_ARM_V4BX) and we shouldn't error on them.
Reviewed By: ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61563
llvm-svn: 361144
Also change some options that have different semantics (cause confusion) in llvm-readelf mode:
-s => -S
-t => --symbols
-sd => --section-data
llvm-svn: 359651
gold and bfd do not include the undefined locals in symtab.
We have no reasons to support that either.
That fixes PR27016
Differential revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18554
llvm-svn: 264843
Fangrui Song