bug-binutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug gas/30688] New: [2.41 regression] Warning: size (8) out of range, i


From: raj.khem at gmail dot com
Subject: [Bug gas/30688] New: [2.41 regression] Warning: size (8) out of range, ignored
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 21:30:53 +0000

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30688

            Bug ID: 30688
           Summary: [2.41 regression] Warning: size (8) out of range,
                    ignored
           Product: binutils
           Version: 2.41
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: gas
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: raj.khem at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

gas is now erroring out on following sample ( reduced from valgrind )

##################################
.text
mov text_buf(%rdx), %al
.bss
.lcomm text_buf, 9-1 #bad
#.lcomm text_buf, 7+1 #OK

##################################

% /tmp/obj/gas/as-new a.s
a.s: Assembler messages:
a.s:4: Warning: size (8) out of range, ignored



This works fine with 2.40 release

I have bisected it to this commit

commit 762acf217c4013bed5a4cc679e4bac78d13ce23a
Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Date:   Fri May 19 09:16:04 2023 +0200

    gas: maintain O_constant signedness in more cases

    Unary '~' doesn't really produce an unsigned result. Neither does
    subtraction (unless taking operand values into consideration). And an
    abstract operator applied to two operands which aren't both unsigned
    can't be assumed to yield an unsigned result; exceptions are
    - shifts, where only signedness of the left hand operand matters,
    - comparisons, which - unlike unary '!' - produce signed results (they
      deliver 0 or ~0, as opposed to '!', which yields 0 or 1),
    - logical operators (yielding 0 or 1 and hence treated like unary '!').

    While doing this (specifically while extending the all/quad testcase),
    update .quad and .8byte documentation: With 64-bit architectures now
    being common, it is highly inappropriate to state that these directives
    unconditionally require bignums.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]