[Bug gas/10636] New: x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address

[hjl@gnu-6 lrb]$ cat s.s
        mov 0xFEE000F0,%eax
        mov 0xFEE000F0,%ebx
[hjl@gnu-6 lrb]$ gcc -c s.s
[hjl@gnu-6 lrb]$ objdump -dw s.o

s.o:     file format elf64-x86-64


Disassembly of section .text:

0000000000000000 <.text>:
   0:   8b 04 25 f0 00 e0 fe    mov    0xfffffffffee000f0,%eax
   7:   8b 1c 25 f0 00 e0 fe    mov    0xfffffffffee000f0,%ebx
[hjl@gnu-6 lrb]$

Since the displacement is signed extended to 64bit, we need to
handle it properly.

--
           Summary: x86-64 assembler misassemble 32bit absolute address
           Product: binutils
           Version: 2.21 (HEAD)
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: gas
        AssignedTo: unassigned at sources dot redhat dot com
        ReportedBy: hjl dot tools at gmail dot com
                CC: bug-binutils at gnu dot org


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-09-14 13:58 -------
Subject: Bug 10636

CVSROOT: /cvs/src
Module name: src
Changes by: hjl@... 2009-09-14 13:57:45

Modified files:
        gas            : ChangeLog
        gas/config     : tc-i386.c
        gas/testsuite  : ChangeLog
        gas/testsuite/gas/i386: i386.exp x86-64-addr32-intel.d
                                x86-64-addr32.d x86-64-addr32.s
                                x86-64-inval.l x86-64-inval.s
                                x86-64-prescott.d x86-64-prescott.s
Added files:
        gas/testsuite/gas/i386: disp.d disp.s x86-64-disp.d
                                x86-64-disp.s

Log message:
        gas/
       
        2009-09-14  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@...>
       
        PR gas/10636
        * config/tc-i386.c (optimize_disp): Set disp32 for 64bit only
        if there is an ADDR_PREFIX.
        (i386_finalize_displacement): Repor error if signed 32bit
        displacement is out of range.
       
        gas/testsuite/
       
        2009-09-14  H.J. Lu  <hongjiu.lu@...>
       
        PR gas/10636
        * gas/i386/disp.d: New.
        * gas/i386/disp.s: Likewise.
        * gas/i386/x86-64-disp.d: Likewise.
        * gas/i386/x86-64-disp.s: Likewise.
       
        * gas/i386/i386.exp: Run disp and x86-64-disp.
       
        * gas/i386/x86-64-addr32.s: Add high 32bit displacement tests.
       
        * gas/i386/x86-64-addr32.d: Updated.
        * gas/i386/x86-64-addr32-intel.d: Likewise.
        * gas/i386/x86-64-inval.l: Likewise.
        * gas/i386/x86-64-prescott.d: Likewise.
       
        * gas/i386/x86-64-inval.s: Add invalid displacement tests.
       
        * gas/i386/x86-64-prescott.s: Replace 0x90909090 displacement
        with 0x909090.

Patches:
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.3952&r2=1.3953
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/config/tc-i386.c.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.393&r2=1.394
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/ChangeLog.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1545&r2=1.1546
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/disp.d.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/disp.s.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-disp.d.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-disp.s.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=NONE&r2=1.1
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/i386.exp.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.117&r2=1.118
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-addr32-intel.d.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-addr32.d.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.5&r2=1.6
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-addr32.s.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.3&r2=1.4
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-inval.l.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.13&r2=1.14
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-inval.s.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.12&r2=1.13
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-prescott.d.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.3&r2=1.4
http://sources.redhat.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-prescott.s.diff?cvsroot=src&r1=1.2&r2=1.3



--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2009-09-14 22:06 -------
Fixed.

--
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-10-16 06:45 -------
so i guess it's expected that openssl will no longer assemble with this change ?

make[3]: Entering directory
`/var/tmp/portage/dev-libs/openssl-0.9.8k-r1/work/openssl-0.9.8k/crypto/md5'
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -I.. -I../.. -I../../include -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DZLIB
-DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO
 -Wall -DMD32_REG_T=int -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM
-DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DAES_ASM -O2 -march=k8 -pipe -g
-Wimplicit-function-declaration
 -Wa,--noexecstack -c  -o md5-x86_64.o md5-x86_64.s
md5-x86_64.s: Assembler messages:
md5-x86_64.s:41: Error: 0xd76aa478 out range of signed 32bit displacement
md5-x86_64.s:50: Error: 0xe8c7b756 out range of signed 32bit displacement
md5-x86_64.s:68: Error: 0xc1bdceee out range of signed 32bit displacement
md5-x86_64.s:77: Error: 0xf57c0faf out range of signed 32bit displacement
.....

41:    leal    3614090360(%rax,%r10,1),%eax
50:    leal    3905402710(%rdx,%r10,1),%edx
68:    leal    3250441966(%rbx,%r10,1),%ebx
77:    leal    4118548399(%rax,%r10,1),%eax

--
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |toolchain at gentoo dot org


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2009-10-16 13:35 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> so i guess it's expected that openssl will no longer assemble with this change ?
>
> 41:    leal    3614090360(%rax,%r10,1),%eax
> 50:    leal    3905402710(%rdx,%r10,1),%edx
> 68:    leal    3250441966(%rbx,%r10,1),%ebx
> 77:    leal    4118548399(%rax,%r10,1),%eax

These displacements can't be encoded with signed 32bit integers.


--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-10-16 15:11 -------
thanks, just wanted to make sure the issue was with the assembly code

i'm not terribly great with x86 assembly.  could you suggest a fix ?  every
statement that is failing (44 of them) are exactly the same form but a different
constant.

--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2009-10-16 15:36 -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> thanks, just wanted to make sure the issue was with the assembly code
>
> i'm not terribly great with x86 assembly.  could you suggest a fix ?  every
> statement that is failing (44 of them) are exactly the same form but a different
> constant.

First verify if they really should be negative values. If yes, change
them to negative values. If no, rewrite them.

--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-10-16 16:19 -------
i'm pretty sure they should all be unsigned

--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From hjl dot tools at gmail dot com  2009-10-16 16:39 -------
(In reply to comment #7)
> i'm pretty sure they should all be unsigned

How does code work since hardware treats them as signed for calculation?

--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils

------- Additional Comments From vapier at gentoo dot org  2009-10-16 21:41 -------
i have no idea.  i'm not an openssl expert let alone x86 assembly.  guess i'll
just file a bug report upstream and let them handle it.

--


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10636

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils