Home > Error Cannot > Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva

Error Cannot Represent Relocation Type Bfd_reloc_rva

Index Nav: [DateIndex] [SubjectIndex] [AuthorIndex] [ThreadIndex] Message Nav: [DatePrev][DateNext] [ThreadPrev][ThreadNext] Other format: [Raw text] Re: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 From: Nick Clifton To: kanishk But how can I compile them? -- LeVA Previous message: [lazarus] cant find unit interfacebase Next message: [lazarus] cant find unit interfacebase Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr49860.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr48084-1.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr48084-2.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr48084-3.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr48084-4.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr48084-5.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr49504.c Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog Format For Printing -XML -Clone This Bug -Top of page Home | New | Browse | Search | [?] | Reports 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 navigate here

Maybe 64-bit mode is being selected inside the assembler source file. I'm not quite understand what you're saying unfortunately :) I'm not that guru in this. Thank you again.2009/5/16 Erik van Pienbroek <[hidden email]> Op zaterdag 16-05-2009 om 13:44 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Fabrício Godoy: > Hi, > > I'm trying use dlltool but I get following Those generated codes aren't very efficient for x32. http://mingw-users.1079350.n2.nabble.com/Error-using-dlltool-td2913097.html

Take a look at the gas command line being issued by gcc when you are compiling application.c. Free forum by Nabble Edit this page Fedora Mailing-Lists Sign In Sign Up Sign In Sign Up Manage this list 2016 October September August July June May April March February January We will investigate it later.

You are calling your native Linux "as". It is the same issue as [1]. [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01825.html Comment 2 H.J. 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 Attachments: iphlpapi.def (application/octet-stream — 43 bytes) attachment.html (text/html — 1.2 KB) +0/-0 Like / Dislike Reply Show replies by date 2704 days inactive 2704 days old [email protected] Manage subscription 2 comments 2 participants

Modified: branches/x32/gcc/ChangeLog.x32 branches/x32/gcc/config/i386/i386.md branches/x32/gcc/config/i386/predicates.md Comment 13 hjl@gcc.gnu.org 2011-08-06 14:05:43 UTC Author: hjl Date: Sat Aug 6 14:05:39 2011 New Revision: 177509 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177509 Log: Add testcases for PRs 48084/49504/49860. 2011-08-06 H.J. For this testcase, x32 should generate > > very similar code to ia32, except for additional 8 registers. Now I've upgraded to fpc1.9.1 (because I want to use the fpimage feature), and now I have this problem: when I compile lazarus/lcl with OS_TARGET=win32, it can not compile linux nor https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49860 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);

Generic CentOS 6 binutils gives this: objcopy -O verilog file.elf file.v *** stack smashing detected ***: objcopy terminated ======= Backtrace: ========= /lib/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x4d)[0x2dedad] /lib/libc.so.6[0x2ded5a] /usr/lib/libbfd-2.20.51.0.2-5.42.el6.so[0x498544] /usr/lib/libbfd-2.20.51.0.2-5.42.el6.so[0x42856c] -- You are receiving this mail Alfred Lam Re: undefined ELF header when ... But you can't change it. Do I have to use the old 1.0.10fpc if I want to make win32 binaries, or I can use 1.9.1 too?

It is the > same issue as [1]. > > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01825.html X32 is 32bit environment. https://sourceforge.net/p/mingw/mailman/attachment/f038efdf0905160944v4[email protected]/1/ Re: undefined reference continues Alfred Lam undefined ELF header when porting ... I got a bad feeling about these units are not for >>the 1.9.1 version of fpc. 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

I have those utils, because previously I could make win32 binaries with lazarus and fpc1.0.10. check over here Lu 2011-07-27 16:14:39 UTC (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > > > > This testcase is about valid address for x86_64_immediate_operand > > > The assembler is generating an object file which contains the BFD_RELOC_64 relocation. The ld is linked as ldw, and the as is linked as asw.

make[4]: Entering directory `/home/leva/FreePascal/src/fpc/rtl/win32' as -o wprt0.o wprt0.as wprt0.as: Assembler messages: wprt0.as:29: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA wprt0.as:31: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA wprt0.as:32: Error: cannot represent relocation type Assembler should put correctly > zero-extended symbol at the relocation site. So the assembler must think that it is creating a 64-bit binary. his comment is here Illustration: $ ./dlltool -l /dev/null /dev/null dndibh.s: Assembler messages: dndibh.s:5: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA dndibh.s:10: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA dndibh.s:11: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA ./dlltool:

There is > a problem somewhere. It is *movdi_internal_rex64. Most annoying abuses are: 1) Top posting 2) Thread hijacking 3) HTML/MIME encoded mail 4) Improper quoting 5) Improper trimming _______________________________________________ You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at:

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. For the testcase from PR, > > expand generates SImode symbol that is later extended to DImode and handled > > through movabs. > > This testcase is about valid address Above results are produced if binutils are built by developer toolset 3 on 32 bit CentOS 6. Comment 4 H.J.

And if I can use the 1.9.1, do I have to compile my own win32 units, or I can use these: ftp://gd.tuwien.ac.at/languages/pascal/fpc/snapshot/v11/win32-i386/ Are these for fpc1.9.1? 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") > > 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. http://oncarecrm.com/error-cannot/error-cannot-represent-relocation-type-bfd-reloc-sh-imm8.html I can not compile my own win32 units because of the following compilation errror: (~/FreePascal/src/fpc)-$ make clean (~/FreePascal/src/fpc)-$ make OS_TARGET=win32 all ... .... .....

Comment 8 H.J. Am I right? > > > You need a cross compiled as and ld with target that supports win32. Thank you. Illustration: $ ./dlltool -l /dev/null /dev/null dndibh.s: Assembler messages: dndibh.s:5: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA dndibh.s:10: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA dndibh.s:11: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_RVA ./dlltool:

Or it doesn't matter? Most annoying abuses are: 1) Top posting 2) Thread hijacking 3) HTML/MIME encoded mail 4) Improper quoting 5) Improper trimming _______________________________________________ You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: Lu PR target/48084 * gcc.target/i386/pr48084-1.c: New. * gcc.target/i386/pr48084-2.c: Likewise. * gcc.target/i386/pr48084-3.c: Likewise. * gcc.target/i386/pr48084-4.c: Likewise. * gcc.target/i386/pr48084-5.c: Likewise. Comment 6 H.J.

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 Lu PR target/49860 * gcc.target/i386/pr47446-3.c: Renamed to ... * gcc.target/i386/pr49860-1.c: This. Can you prevent x32 to generate DImode symbols? In another word, if a memory operand is OK for ia32, it must be OK for x32.

It is the > > > same issue as [1]. > > > > > > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2011-07/msg01825.html > > > > X32 is 32bit environment. Cheers Nick References: Fwd: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 From: kanishk rastogi Re: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 From: Ramana Radhakrishnan Re: Error: cannot represent relocation type BFD_RELOC_64 From: Lu 2011-07-27 12:39:39 UTC (In reply to comment #1) > Assembler should accept R_X86_64_64 and zero-extend it to 8 bytes. Assembler is done on purpose to catch problems like this.

No, since Pmode is still in > > > DImode and DImode addresses are *valid* addresses.