From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Mosberger Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 20:59:06 +0000 Subject: Re: heads up: apparent GAS bug in current (CVS) binutils Message-Id: <17029.5402.827349.738563@napali.hpl.hp.com> List-Id: References: <200505122155.j4CLteGX024882@napali.hpl.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <200505122155.j4CLteGX024882@napali.hpl.hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org >>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2005 13:50:04 -0700, "H. J. Lu" said: HJ> On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 01:34:10PM -0700, David Mosberger wrote: >> >>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2005 10:32:19 -0700, "Lu, Hongjiu" >> said: HJ> I tried binutils 2.15.92.0.2 20040927 and got the same HJ> result. What is the version of assembler which you think is HJ> good? >> The standard Debian/sarge as seems fine: >> $ as -v GNU assembler version 2.15 (ia64-linux) using BFD version >> 2.15 HJ> As I have mentioned before, it is an IPF specific kernel issue. HJ> Basically, when you use weak functions, unwind info may be HJ> wrong. I am enclosing an updated kernel patch. I agree that this is weird code that needs to be fixed, preferably by not using weak functions at all (as Andreas suggested). However, there still seems to be a binutils issues here: if this is something binutils cannot properly support, it should issue an error, not silently generate wrong code, no? --david