I found this missing case with the new --check-dynamic-relocation flag
while running the lld tests with --apply-dynamic-relocs enabled by default.
This is the same as D101452 just for RISC-V
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D101454
The scope of R_TLS (TP offset relocation types (TPREL/TPOFF) used for the
local-exec TLS model) is actually narrower than its name may imply. R_TLS_NEG
is only used by Solaris R_386_TLS_LE_32.
Rename them so that they will be less confusing.
Reviewed By: grimar, psmith, rprichard
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D93467
`ELFFile<ELFT>` has many methods that take pointers,
though they assume that arguments are never null and
hence could take references instead.
This patch performs such clean-up.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D87385
Symbol information can be used to improve out-of-range/misalignment diagnostics.
It also helps R_ARM_CALL/R_ARM_THM_CALL which has different behaviors with different symbol types.
There are many (67) relocateOne() call sites used in thunks, {Arm,AArch64}errata, PLT, etc.
Rename them to `relocateNoSym()` to be clearer that there is no symbol information.
Reviewed By: grimar, peter.smith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D73254
Summary:
Unlike R_RISCV_RELAX, which is a linker hint, R_RISCV_ALIGN requires the
support of the linker even when ignoring all R_RISCV_RELAX relocations.
This is because the compiler emits as many NOPs as may be required for
the requested alignment, more than may be required pre-relaxation, to
allow for the target becoming more unaligned after relaxing earlier
sequences. This means that the target is often not initially aligned in
the object files, and so the R_RISCV_ALIGN relocations cannot just be
ignored. Since we do not support linker relaxation, we must turn these
into errors.
Reviewers: ruiu, MaskRay, espindola
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Subscribers: grimar, Jim, emaste, arichardson, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, sabuasal, niosHD, kito-cheng, shiva0217, zzheng, edward-jones, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, rkruppe, PkmX, jocewei, psnobl, benna, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, sameer.abuasal, apazos, luismarques, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71820
Summary:
If none of the input files are ELF object files (for example, when
generating an object file from a single binary input file via
"-b binary"), use a fallback value for the ELF header flags instead
of crashing with an assertion failure.
Reviewers: MaskRay, ruiu, espindola
Reviewed By: MaskRay, ruiu
Subscribers: kevans, grimar, emaste, arichardson, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, sabuasal, niosHD, kito-cheng, shiva0217, zzheng, edward-jones, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, rkruppe, PkmX, jocewei, psnobl, benna, Jim, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, sameer.abuasal, apazos, luismarques, llvm-commits, jrtc27
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71101
PltSection is used by both PLT and IPLT. The PLT section may have a
header while the IPLT section does not. Split off IpltSection from
PltSection to be clearer.
Unlike other targets, PPC64 cannot use the same code sequence for PLT
and IPLT. This helps make a future PPC64 patch (D71509) more isolated.
On EM_386 and EM_X86_64, when PLT is empty while IPLT is not, currently
we are inconsistent whether the PLT header is conceptually attached to
in.plt or in.iplt . Consistently attach the header to in.plt can make
the -z retpolineplt logic simpler. It also makes `jmp` point to an
aesthetically better place for non-retpolineplt cases.
Reviewed By: grimar, ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71519
This change only affects EM_386. relOff can be computed from `index`
easily, so it is unnecessarily passed as a parameter.
Both in.plt and in.iplt entries are written by writePLT. For in.iplt,
the instruction `push reloc_offset` will change because `index` is now
different. Fortunately, this does not matter because `push; jmp` is only
used by PLT. IPLT does not need the code sequence.
Reviewed By: grimar, ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71518
This makes it clear `ELF/**/*.cpp` files define things in the `lld::elf`
namespace and simplifies `elf::foo` to `foo`.
Reviewed By: atanasyan, grimar, ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68323
llvm-svn: 373885
This patch is mechanically generated by clang-llvm-rename tool that I wrote
using Clang Refactoring Engine just for creating this patch. You can see the
source code of the tool at https://reviews.llvm.org/D64123. There's no manual
post-processing; you can generate the same patch by re-running the tool against
lld's code base.
Here is the main discussion thread to change the LLVM coding style:
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/130083.html
In the discussion thread, I proposed we use lld as a testbed for variable
naming scheme change, and this patch does that.
I chose to rename variables so that they are in camelCase, just because that
is a minimal change to make variables to start with a lowercase letter.
Note to downstream patch maintainers: if you are maintaining a downstream lld
repo, just rebasing ahead of this commit would cause massive merge conflicts
because this patch essentially changes every line in the lld subdirectory. But
there's a remedy.
clang-llvm-rename tool is a batch tool, so you can rename variables in your
downstream repo with the tool. Given that, here is how to rebase your repo to
a commit after the mass renaming:
1. rebase to the commit just before the mass variable renaming,
2. apply the tool to your downstream repo to mass-rename variables locally, and
3. rebase again to the head.
Most changes made by the tool should be identical for a downstream repo and
for the head, so at the step 3, almost all changes should be merged and
disappear. I'd expect that there would be some lines that you need to merge by
hand, but that shouldn't be too many.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64121
llvm-svn: 365595
GCC emits warning on this line:
error: enumeral and non-enumeral type in conditional
expression [-Werror=extra]
Change-Id: I04969cc32e27e310968b88ebaa4e1c4894528d74
llvm-svn: 365434
RISC-V psABI doesn't specify TLS relaxation. It can be handled the same
way as we handle ARM TLS. RISC-V TLS is even simpler because GD/LD use
the same relocation type.
Reviewed By: jrtc27, ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63220
llvm-svn: 364813
* Handle initial relocation types: R_RISCV_CALL_PLT and R_RISCV_GOT_HI20.
* Produce dynamic relocation types: R_RISCV_COPY, R_RISCV_RELATIVE, R_RISCV_JUMP_SLOT.
* Define SymbolRel as R_RISCV_{32,64}
* Generate PLT header: it is used by lazy binding PLT in glibc.
* R_RISCV_CALL is changed from R_PC to R_PC_PLT. If the target symbol is preemptable, this will suppress an unnecessary "canonical PLT".
This behavior is different from ld.bfd but it is agreed the current lld behavior is favored.
I have received positive responses from the binutils maintainer that the ABI/binutils implementation can be improved, see:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-elf-psabi-doc/issues/98https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24685
Many -no-pie/-pie/-shared programs linked against musl or glibc should work with this patch.
Reviewed By: jrtc27
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63076
llvm-svn: 364812
R_RISCV_{ADD,SET,SUB}* are used for local label computation.
Add a new RelExpr member R_RISCV_ADD to represent them.
R_RISCV_ADD is treated as a link-time constant because otherwise
R_RISCV_{ADD,SET,SUB}* are not allowed in -pie/-shared mode.
In glibc Scrt1.o, .rela.eh_frame contains such relocations.
Because .eh_frame is not writable, we get this error:
ld.lld: error: can't create dynamic relocation R_RISCV_ADD32 against symbol: .L0 in readonly segment; recompil object files with -fPIC or pass '-Wl,-z,notext' to allow text relocations in the output
>>> defined in ..../riscv64-linux-gnu/lib/Scrt1.o
With D63076 and this patch, I can run -pie/-shared programs linked against glibc.
Note llvm-mc cannot currently produce R_RISCV_SET* so they are not tested.
Reviewed By: ruiu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63183
llvm-svn: 363128
The code previously specified a 32-bit range for R_RISCV_HI20 and
R_RISCV_LO12_[IS], however this is incorrect as the maximum offset on
RV64 that can be formed from the immediate of lui and the displacement
of an I-type or S-type instruction is -0x80000800 to 0x7ffff7ff. There
is also the same issue with a c.lui and LO12 pair, whose actual
addressable range should be -0x20800 to 0x1f7ff.
The tests will be included in the next patch that converts all RISC-V
tests to use llvm-mc instead of yaml2obj, as assembler support has
matured enough to write tests in them.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60414
llvm-svn: 357995
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
This is https://bugs.llvm.org//show_bug.cgi?id=38919.
Currently, LLD may report "unsupported relocation target while parsing debug info"
when parsing the debug information.
At the same time LLD does that for zeroed R_X86_64_NONE relocations,
which obviously has "invalid" targets.
The nature of R_*_NONE relocation assumes them should be ignored.
This patch teaches LLD to stop reporting the debug information parsing errors for them.
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52408
llvm-svn: 343078
Patch by PkmX.
This patch makes lld recognize RISC-V target and implements basic
relocation for RV32/RV64 (and RVC). This should be necessary for static
linking ELF applications.
The ABI documentation for RISC-V can be found at:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-elf-psabi-doc/blob/master/riscv-elf.md.
Note that the documentation is far from complete so we had to figure out
some details from bfd.
The patch should be pretty straightforward. Some highlights:
- A new relocation Expr R_RISCV_PC_INDIRECT is added. This is needed as
the low part of a PC-relative relocation is linked to the corresponding
high part (auipc), see:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-elf-psabi-doc/blob/master/riscv-elf.md#pc-relative-symbol-addresses
- LLVM's MC support for RISC-V is very incomplete (we are working on
this), so tests are given in objectyaml format with the original
assembly included in the comments. Once we have complete support for
RISC-V in MC, we can switch to llvm-as/llvm-objdump.
- We don't support linker relaxation for now as it requires greater
changes to lld that is beyond the scope of this patch. Once this is
accepted we can start to work on adding relaxation to lld.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39322
llvm-svn: 339364
Alex Richardson