[PATCH v12 02/25] Object Attributes v2: new abstractions for subsections and attributes

[Alan Modra]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 03:17:16PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 23.01.2026 13:17, Matthieu Longo wrote:
> > On 23/01/2026 11:24, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> >>   This patch caused hundreds of regressions for `csky-elf' and `csky-linux'
> >> making the targets unusable:
> >>
> >> .../gas/as-new: BFD (GNU Binutils) 2.45.50.20260123 assertion fail .../bfd/elf-attrs.c:2515
> >>
> >> Please have a look into it.
> >
> > Here is a first patch to "solve" the issue:
> > 
> > --- a/gas/config/tc-csky.c
> > +++ b/gas/config/tc-csky.c
> > @@ -1712,6 +1712,9 @@ md_begin (void)
> >         mach_flag |= CSKY_ARCH_610;
> >       }
> > 
> > +   elf_obj_attr_version (stdoutput)
> > +    = get_elf_backend_data (stdoutput)->default_obj_attr_version;
> > +
> >     /* Find bfd_mach_flag, it will set to bfd backend data.  */
> >     for (p_arch = csky_archs; p_arch->arch_flag != 0; p_arch++)
> >       if ((mach_flag & CSKY_ARCH_MASK) == (p_arch->arch_flag & CSKY_ARCH_MASK))
> > 
> > However, I am wondering if this is the right place to do such an initialization.
> 
> Well, you provide too little info. md_begin() runs ahead of ...
> 
> > The initialization of the default attribute version occurs inside elf_begin() in obj-elf.c
> 
> ... elf_begin(). Question is whether C-Sky needs what you'd normally do in
> elf_begin() already earlier for whatever reason. If so, with a respective
> comment the change above might be appropriate. To decide, the call stack
> leading to the assertion failure would be of interest. (From that it might
> then also turn out that the assertion itself is inappropriate to have.)
> 
> As an aside, it looks as if tc-csky.c means to be prepared for use with
> non-ELF. You'd want to wrap your addition in #ifdef OBJ_ELF.

I'll handle this one.  I intend to move the obj_begin call earlier.

-- 
Alan Modra