From 014a602b86f08de96fc80ef3f96a87db6cccad56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alan Modra Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 12:47:09 +0930 Subject: [PATCH] Don't optimise bfd_seek to same position It's not worth avoiding an fseek to the same position, and can cause problems if the linker's output file (which is opened "w+") is read, because that can result in writing, reading, then writing again. POSIX.1-2017 (IEEE Std 1003.1) says of fopen: "When a file is opened with update mode ('+' as the second or third character in the mode argument), both input and output may be performed on the associated stream. However, the application shall ensure that output is not directly followed by input without an intervening call to fflush() or to a file positioning function (fseek(), fsetpos(), or rewind()), and input is not directly followed by output without an intervening call to a file positioning function, unless the input operation encounters end-of-file." * bfdio.c (bfd_seek): Always call iovec->bseek. --- bfd/bfdio.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/bfd/bfdio.c b/bfd/bfdio.c index 75a3309c582..22c39a7b0cc 100644 --- a/bfd/bfdio.c +++ b/bfd/bfdio.c @@ -456,10 +456,6 @@ bfd_seek (bfd *abfd, file_ptr position, int direction) if (direction != SEEK_CUR) position += offset; - if ((direction == SEEK_CUR && position == 0) - || (direction == SEEK_SET && (ufile_ptr) position == abfd->where)) - return 0; - result = abfd->iovec->bseek (abfd, position, direction); if (result != 0) { -- 2.30.2