[PATCH] V850/BFD: Fix uninitialized `insn[4]' with R_V850_LONGJUMP warning
Maciej W. Rozycki
macro@wdc.com
Mon Feb 3 16:07:00 GMT 2020
Correctly point at `insn[2]' rather than `insn[4]' in determining that
the third instruction from where an R_V850_LONGJUMP relocation points at
is not a recognized one, fixing a problem with commit 86aba9dbfa7e ("Add
linker relaxation to v850 toolchain") resulting in a build failure like:
.../bfd/elf32-v850.c: In function 'v850_elf_relax_section':
.../bfd/elf32-v850.c:3854:5: error: 'insn[4]' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
3854 | _bfd_error_handler
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3855 | /* xgettext:c-format */
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3856 | (_("%pB: %#" PRIx64 ": warning: %s points to "
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3857 | "unrecognized insn %#x"),
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3858 | abfd,
| ~~~~~
3859 | (uint64_t) (irel->r_offset + no_match),
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3860 | "R_V850_LONGJUMP",
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3861 | insn[no_match]);
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Makefile:1608: recipe for target 'elf32-v850.lo' failed
make[4]: *** [elf32-v850.lo] Error 1
with GCC 10.
bfd/
* elf32-v850.c (v850_elf_relax_section): Fix the index used for
reporting an unrecognized instruction with R_V850_LONGJUMP.
---
Hi,
Observed in a GDB build with `--enable-targets=all'. Obviously GCC must
have become cleverer lately. OK to apply?
Maciej
---
bfd/elf32-v850.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
binutils-bfd-v850-longjump-no-match.diff
Index: binutils-gdb/bfd/elf32-v850.c
===================================================================
--- binutils-gdb.orig/bfd/elf32-v850.c
+++ binutils-gdb/bfd/elf32-v850.c
@@ -3837,7 +3837,7 @@ v850_elf_relax_section (bfd *abfd,
if (no_match < 0
&& ((insn[2] & JMP_R_MASK) != JMP_R
|| MOVEA_R2 (insn[1]) != JMP_R1 (insn[2])))
- no_match = 4;
+ no_match = 2;
}
else
{
More information about the Binutils
mailing list