Do not create R_X86_64_32S in dyna relo tbl

[shenhan]

Summary

We have a case that creates in the dynamic relocation table an R_X86_64_32S entry, which is not a valid dynamic relocation type at all.

Fixed by properly handle this in the back end.

BUG

[ruiu]

LGTM

ELF/Arch/X86_64.cpp

160

Please use clang-format. I believe that clang-format would align them vertically like before.

[shenhan]

clang-format the changed lines in X86_64.cpp

[ruiu]

LGTM'ed already. Please commit.

[MaskRay]

test/ELF/x86-64-reloc-32s.s

11

space between , and @

[• espindola]

LGTM, but it needs to be rebased now.

Do you have commit access?

ELF/Arch/X86_64.cpp

   };
   memcpy(Buf, Inst, sizeof(Inst));
 
   write32le(Buf + 2, GotPltEntryAddr - PltEntryAddr - 6);
   write32le(Buf + 7, Index);
   write32le(Buf + 12, -getPltEntryOffset(Index) - 16);
 }
 
 template <class ELFT> bool X86_64<ELFT>::isPicRel(RelType Type) const {
   return Type != R_X86_64_PC32 && Type != R_X86_64_32 &&
-         Type != R_X86_64_TPOFF32;
+    Type != R_X86_64_32S && Type != R_X86_64_TPOFF32;
 }
 
 template <class ELFT>
 void X86_64<ELFT>::relaxTlsGdToLe(uint8_t *Loc, RelType Type,
                                   uint64_t Val) const {
   // Convert
   //   .byte 0x66
   //   leaq x@tlsgd(%rip), %rdi
   //   .word 0x6666
   //   rex64

test/ELF/Inputs/x86-64-reloc-32s-input.s

+.globl foo
+.type foo,@object
+.size foo, 8
+foo:
+  .quad 0x12

test/ELF/x86-64-reloc-32s.s

+// REQUIRES: x86
+// RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=x86_64-pc-linux %s -o %t.o
+// RUN: llvm-mc -filetype=obj -triple=x86_64-pc--linux %p/Inputs/x86-64-reloc-32s-input.s -o %t2.o
+// RUN: ld.lld -shared %t2.o -o %t2.so
+// RUN: ld.lld -e main -z notext %t.o %t2.so -o %t3.out
+// RUN: llvm-readobj -r %t3.out | FileCheck %s
+
+.data
+.long foo
+.type foo,@object
+.size foo, 8
+
+.text
+.globl main
+.type main, @function
+main:
+  movq  foo, %rax
+
+// CHECK:       Relocations [
+// CHECK-NEXT:      Section ({{.*}}) .rela.dyn {
+// CHECK-NEXT:          R_X86_64_COPY foo 0x0
+// CHECK-NEXT:      }
+// CHECK-NEXT:  ]