[Bug target/101448] Use GCC 9.3.0 to build Ceph crimson-osd on Arm64, linker failed for relocation truncated to fit: R_AARCH64_CALL26 against symbol

xinliang.liu at linaro dot org gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Thu Jul 15 09:42:37 GMT 2021


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101448

--- Comment #4 from Xinliang <xinliang.liu at linaro dot org> ---
Looking into the relocation code[1] of ld.
I'm very curious why ld can't handle long call here.

[1]:
```
 2976 static enum elf_aarch64_stub_type
 2977 aarch64_type_of_stub (asection *input_sec,
 2978                       const Elf_Internal_Rela *rel,
 2979                       asection *sym_sec,
 2980                       unsigned char st_type,
 2981                       bfd_vma destination)
 2982 {
 2983   bfd_vma location;
 2984   bfd_signed_vma branch_offset;
 2985   unsigned int r_type;
 2986   enum elf_aarch64_stub_type stub_type = aarch64_stub_none;
 2987
 2988   if (st_type != STT_FUNC
 2989       && (sym_sec == input_sec))
 2990     return stub_type;
 2991
 2992   /* Determine where the call point is.  */
 2993   location = (input_sec->output_offset
 2994               + input_sec->output_section->vma + rel->r_offset);
 2995
 2996   branch_offset = (bfd_signed_vma) (destination - location);
 2997
 2998   r_type = ELFNN_R_TYPE (rel->r_info);
 2999
 3000   /* We don't want to redirect any old unconditional jump in this way,
 3001      only one which is being used for a sibcall, where it is
 3002      acceptable for the IP0 and IP1 registers to be clobbered.  */
 3003   if ((r_type == AARCH64_R (CALL26) || r_type == AARCH64_R (JUMP26))
 3004       && (branch_offset > AARCH64_MAX_FWD_BRANCH_OFFSET
 3005           || branch_offset < AARCH64_MAX_BWD_BRANCH_OFFSET))
 3006     {
 3007       stub_type = aarch64_stub_long_branch;
 3008     }
 3009
 3010   return stub_type;
 3011 }
```
https://sourceware.org/git/?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=blob;f=bfd/elfnn-aarch64.c;h=097a275990f1d350be8f68943093926a5c66157a;hb=07f9ddfeba5b572451471f905473f7ddbba1d472#l2316

FYI, there is a similar bug with the same error msg:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18668


More information about the Gcc-bugs mailing list