Home > Error Cannot > Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva

Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva

Contents

For the testcase from PR, expand generates SImode symbol that is later extended to DImode and handled through movabs. Above results are produced if binutils are built by developer toolset 3 on 32 bit CentOS 6. The ld is linked as ldw, and the as is linked as asw. For the testcase from PR, > expand generates SImode symbol that is later extended to DImode and handled > through movabs. his comment is here

I have these binaries: i686-pc-mingw32-addr2line i686-pc-mingw32-dlltool i686-pc-mingw32-objcopy i686-pc-mingw32-size i686-pc-mingw32-ar i686-pc-mingw32-dllwrap i686-pc-mingw32-objdump i686-pc-mingw32-strings i686-pc-mingw32-as i686-pc-mingw32-ld i686-pc-mingw32-ranlib i686-pc-mingw32-strip i686-pc-mingw32-c++filt i686-pc-mingw32-nm i686-pc-mingw32-readelf i686-pc-mingw32-windres and all of them are symlinked to my $PATH. You are calling your native Linux "as". Attached is dh.s and scdll32.def Thanks, Alfred dh.s Description: Binary data scdll32.def Description: Binary data -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Previous message View by thread But you can't change it. http://mingw-users.1079350.n2.nabble.com/Error-using-dlltool-td2913097.html

Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva

It is the same issue as [1]. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01825.html Comment 2 H.J. There is > a problem somewhere. First Post Replies Stats Go to ----- 2016 ----- October September August July June May April March February January ----- 2015 ----- December November October September August July June May April

There is a problem somewhere. No, since Pmode is still in DImode and DImode addresses are *valid* addresses. So the assembler must think that it is creating a 64-bit binary. I have those utils, because previously I could make win32 binaries with lazarus and fpc1.0.10.

We ask that you be polite and do the same. Few days ago, with fpc1.0.10, and cvs lazarus, I could build to all platforms with those tools. In > another word, if a memory operand is OK for ia32, it must be OK > for x32. his comment is here By the way, what happened to the cross tool triplet prefix? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables

Comment 7 Uroš Bizjak 2011-07-27 16:04:47 UTC (In reply to comment #6) > > > This testcase is about valid address for x86_64_immediate_operand > > > and x86_64_zext_immediate_operand. Lu PR target/49860 * gcc.target/i386/pr47446-3.c: Renamed to ... * gcc.target/i386/pr49860-1.c: This. If it is valid for TARGET_32BIT, > it should be valid for TARGET_X32. (define_predicate "x86_64_immediate_operand" (match_code "const_int,symbol_ref,label_ref,const") { if (!TARGET_64BIT) return immediate_operand (op, mode); ... } I guess the code above Take a look at the gas command line being issued by gcc when you are compiling application.c.

For this testcase, x32 should generate > > very similar code to ia32, except for additional 8 registers. https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw/mailman/attachment/[email protected]/1/ Or it doesn't matter? Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects_______________________________________________ MinGW-users mailing list [hidden email] This list observes the Etiquette found at http://www.mingw.org/Mailing_Lists. Shankar Unni Alfred Lam Reply via email to Search the site The Mail Archive home cygwin - all messages cygwin - about the list Expand Previous message Next message The Mail

Lu 2011-07-27 16:16:54 UTC Let's punt it for now. this content No, since Pmode is still in > > DImode and DImode addresses are *valid* addresses. Comment 3 Uroš Bizjak 2011-07-27 12:49:52 UTC (In reply to comment #2) > > Assembler should accept R_X86_64_64 and zero-extend it to 8 bytes. Lu 2011-07-27 04:28:49 UTC [hjl@gnu-6 ilp32-30]$ cat x.i extern char inbuf[]; extern char outbuf[]; extern unsigned insize; extern unsigned inptr; static int max_len; static int peek_bits; void build_tree() { int len;

This testcase is about valid address for x86_64_immediate_operand and x86_64_zext_immediate_operand. If it is valid for TARGET_32BIT, > > > > it should be valid for TARGET_X32. > > > > > > (define_predicate "x86_64_immediate_operand" > > > (match_code "const_int,symbol_ref,label_ref,const") > > It is recommended to enable per package instead of globallyemacsAdd support for GNU EmacsDependenciesvirtual / emacs : Virtual for GNU EmacsRuntime Dependenciesvirtual / emacs : Virtual for GNU EmacsDepending packagesapp-shells / weblink Generated output @00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0F C6 00 00 00 00 00 00 2^@0D CE 00 00 00 00 00 00 0D 8E 00 00

Added: branches/x32/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr49860-1.c - copied unchanged from r176926, branches/x32/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr47446-3.c Removed: branches/x32/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr47446-3.c Modified: branches/x32/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog.x32 Comment 11 Uroš Bizjak 2011-08-02 06:36:28 UTC Fixed in binutils [1], not a gcc bug. [1] http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-08/msg00010.html Comment 12 I think that would be better, if I could use my own compiled win32 units, instead of the precompiled ones. The assembler and linker are external > applications from GNU binutils.

I got a bad feeling about these units are not for >>the 1.9.1 version of fpc.

It must handle all immediate_operands. This is artificial limitation. MinGW-users Search everywhere only in this topic Advanced Search Error using dlltool Classic List Threaded ♦ ♦ Locked 3 messages Fabrício Godoy Reply | Threaded Open this post in threaded view Maybe 64-bit mode is being selected inside the assembler source file.

Your patch just papers over this fact. Comment 6 H.J. No, since Pmode is still in > DImode and DImode addresses are *valid* addresses. check over here Bug49860 - [x32] Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 in x32 mode Summary: [x32] Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 in x32 mode Status: RESOLVED INVALID Alias: None Product: gcc Classification:

PS: I can execute the same commad in native Windows without errors.Thank you. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option