From: Alan Modra Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 02:02:38 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Extend the allowed bitfield range (ie. that for which X-Git-Tag: gdb_5_0-2000-04-10-branchpoint~252 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=d5afc56eb1c6a3cc0b3e899664bb59689ba12417;p=platform%2Fupstream%2Fbinutils.git Extend the allowed bitfield range (ie. that for which complain_overflow_bitfield doesn't complain) from -2**(n-1)..2**n-1 to -2**n..2**n. This might mean that some reloc overflows are no longer caught, but it solves the address wrap problem for 16-bit relocs nicely. In any case, ports that rely on complain_overflow_bitfield for reloc overflow checking were not getting a very good check previously. A bitfield range in a machine instruction is typically either the signed or unsigned n bit numbers, not the overlap of these two ranges. --- diff --git a/bfd/ChangeLog b/bfd/ChangeLog index eba4c2d..0dbbc6b 100644 --- a/bfd/ChangeLog +++ b/bfd/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,11 @@ +2000-03-17 Alan Modra + + * reloc.c (bfd_check_overflow): In case complain_overflow_bitfield, + flag an overflow if the bitfield is outside -2**n to 2**n-1. The + allowable range used to be -2**(n-1) to 2**n-1. + * reloc.c (_bfd_relocate_contents): Same here. Also replace + "boolean overflow" with "bfd_reloc_status_type flag". + 2000-03-14 Doug Evans * elf32-m32r.c (m32r_elf_lo16_reloc): Rewrite. diff --git a/bfd/reloc.c b/bfd/reloc.c index c2485b9..7bb771a 100644 --- a/bfd/reloc.c +++ b/bfd/reloc.c @@ -540,17 +540,14 @@ bfd_check_overflow (how, bitsize, rightshift, addrsize, relocation) case complain_overflow_bitfield: /* Bitfields are sometimes signed, sometimes unsigned. We - overflow if the value has some, but not all, bits set outside - the field, or if it has any bits set outside the field but - the sign bit is not set. */ + explicitly allow an address wrap too, which means a bitfield + of n bits is allowed to store -2**n to 2**n-1. Thus overflow + if the value has some, but not all, bits set outside the + field. */ a >>= rightshift; - if ((a & ~ fieldmask) != 0) - { - signmask = (fieldmask >> 1) + 1; - ss = (signmask << rightshift) - 1; - if ((ss | relocation) != ~ (bfd_vma) 0) - flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; - } + ss = a & ~ fieldmask; + if (ss != 0 && ss != (((bfd_vma) -1 >> rightshift) & ~ fieldmask)) + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; break; default: @@ -1428,7 +1425,7 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) { int size; bfd_vma x = 0; - boolean overflow; + bfd_reloc_status_type flag; unsigned int rightshift = howto->rightshift; unsigned int bitpos = howto->bitpos; @@ -1466,7 +1463,7 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) which we don't check for. We must either check at every single operation, which would be tedious, or we must do the computations in a type larger than bfd_vma, which would be inefficient. */ - overflow = false; + flag = bfd_reloc_ok; if (howto->complain_on_overflow != complain_overflow_dont) { bfd_vma addrmask, fieldmask, signmask, ss; @@ -1492,7 +1489,7 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) signmask = ~ (fieldmask >> 1); ss = a & signmask; if (ss != 0 && ss != ((addrmask >> rightshift) & signmask)) - overflow = true; + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; /* We only need this next bit of code if the sign bit of B is below the sign bit of A. This would only happen if @@ -1522,7 +1519,7 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) */ signmask = (fieldmask >> 1) + 1; if (((~ (a ^ b)) & (a ^ sum)) & signmask) - overflow = true; + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; break; @@ -1542,64 +1539,35 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) b = (b & addrmask) >> bitpos; sum = (a + b) & addrmask; if ((a | b | sum) & ~ fieldmask) - overflow = true; + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; break; case complain_overflow_bitfield: - /* Much like unsigned, except no trimming with addrmask. In - addition, the sum overflows if there is a carry out of - the bfd_vma, i.e., the sum is less than either input - operand. */ + /* Much like the signed check, but for a field one bit + wider, and no trimming with addrmask. We allow a + bitfield to represent numbers in the range -2**n to + 2**n-1, where n is the number of bits in the field. + Note that when bfd_vma is 32 bits, a 32-bit reloc can't + overflow, which is exactly what we want. */ a >>= rightshift; - b >>= bitpos; - /* Bitfields are sometimes used for signed numbers; for - example, a 13-bit field sometimes represents values in - 0..8191 and sometimes represents values in -4096..4095. - If the field is signed and a is -4095 (0x1001) and b is - -1 (0x1fff), the sum is -4096 (0x1000), but (0x1001 + - 0x1fff is 0x3000). It's not clear how to handle this - everywhere, since there is no way to know how many bits - are significant in the relocation, but the original code - assumed that it was fully sign extended, and we will keep - that assumption. */ - signmask = (fieldmask >> 1) + 1; - - if ((a & ~ fieldmask) != 0) - { - /* Some bits out of the field are set. This might not - be a problem: if this is a signed bitfield, it is OK - if all the high bits are set, including the sign - bit. We'll try setting all but the most significant - bit in the original relocation value: if this is all - ones, we are OK, assuming a signed bitfield. */ - ss = (signmask << rightshift) - 1; - if ((ss | relocation) != ~ (bfd_vma) 0) - overflow = true; - a &= fieldmask; - } + signmask = ~ fieldmask; + ss = a & signmask; + if (ss != 0 && ss != (((bfd_vma) -1 >> rightshift) & signmask)) + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; - /* We just assume (b & ~ fieldmask) == 0. */ + signmask = ((~ howto->src_mask) >> 1) & howto->src_mask; + if ((b & signmask) != 0) + b -= signmask << 1; - /* We explicitly permit wrap around if this relocation - covers the high bit of an address. The Linux kernel - relies on it, and it is the only way to write assembler - code which can run when loaded at a location 0x80000000 - away from the location at which it is linked. */ - if (howto->bitsize + rightshift - == bfd_arch_bits_per_address (input_bfd)) - break; + b >>= bitpos; sum = a + b; - if (sum < a || (sum & ~ fieldmask) != 0) - { - /* There was a carry out, or the field overflowed. Test - for signed operands again. Here the overflow test is - as for complain_overflow_signed. */ - if (((~ (a ^ b)) & (a ^ sum)) & signmask) - overflow = true; - } + + signmask = fieldmask + 1; + if (((~ (a ^ b)) & (a ^ sum)) & signmask) + flag = bfd_reloc_overflow; break; @@ -1640,7 +1608,7 @@ _bfd_relocate_contents (howto, input_bfd, relocation, location) break; } - return overflow ? bfd_reloc_overflow : bfd_reloc_ok; + return flag; } /*