x86: Restore PC16 relocation overflow check

Message ID 20210527173853.483510-1-hjl.tools@gmail.com
State Superseded
Headers show
Series
  • x86: Restore PC16 relocation overflow check
Related show

Commit Message

Jan Beulich via Binutils May 27, 2021, 5:38 p.m.
The x86-64 psABI has

---
A program or object file using R_X86_64_8, R_X86_64_16, R_X86_64_PC16
or R_X86_64_PC8 relocations is not conformant to this ABI, these
relocations are only added for documentation purposes.
---

Since x86 PC16 relocations were intended for 16-bit programs in an ELF32
or ELF64 container, PC16 relocation should wrap-around in 16-bit address
space.  Revert

commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd
Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

    x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs

and

commit 50c95a739c91ae70cf8481936611aa1f5397a384
Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed May 26 12:13:13 2021 -0700

    x86: Propery check PC16 reloc overflow in 16-bit mode instructions

while keeping PR ld/27905 tests for PC16 relocation in 16-bit programs.

bfd/

	PR ld/27905
	* elf32-i386.c: Don't include "libiberty.h".
	(elf_howto_table): Revert commits a7664973b24 and 50c95a739c9.
	(elf_i386_rtype_to_howto): Revert commit 50c95a739c9.
	(elf_i386_info_to_howto_rel): Likewise.
	(elf_i386_tls_transition): Likewise.
	(elf_i386_relocate_section): Likewise.
	* elf64-x86-64.c (x86_64_elf_howto_table): Revert commits
	a7664973b24 and 50c95a739c9.
	(elf_x86_64_rtype_to_howto): Revert commit 50c95a739c9.
	* elfxx-x86.c (_bfd_x86_elf_parse_gnu_properties): Likewise.
	* elfxx-x86.h (elf_x86_obj_tdata): Likewise.
	(elf_x86_has_code16): Likewise.

binutils/

	PR ld/27905
	* readelf.c (decode_x86_feature_2): Revert commit 50c95a739c9.

gas/

	PR ld/27905
	* config/tc-i386.c (set_code_flag): Revert commit 50c95a739c9.
	(set_16bit_gcc_code_flag): Likewise.
	(x86_cleanup): Likewise.
	* testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d: Updated.
	* testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d: Likewise.

include/

	PR ld/27905
	* elf/common.h (GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16): Removed.

ld/

	PR ld/27905
	* testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp: Don't run pcrel16-2.
	* testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp: Likewise.
	* testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d: Removed.
	* testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s: Likewise.
	* testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d: Likewise.
---
 bfd/elf32-i386.c                         | 25 +++--------
 bfd/elf64-x86-64.c                       | 14 +-----
 bfd/elfxx-x86.c                          |  9 +---
 bfd/elfxx-x86.h                          |  6 ---
 binutils/readelf.c                       |  3 --
 gas/config/tc-i386.c                     | 55 ++++++++----------------
 gas/testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d        |  5 ---
 gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d |  5 ---
 include/elf/common.h                     |  1 -
 ld/testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp            |  1 -
 ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d         |  5 ---
 ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s         | 12 ------
 ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d       |  5 ---
 ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp        |  1 -
 14 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 120 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d
 delete mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s
 delete mode 100644 ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d

-- 
2.31.1

Comments

Jan Beulich via Binutils May 28, 2021, 6:48 a.m. | #1
On 27.05.2021 19:38, H.J. Lu wrote:
> The x86-64 psABI has

> 

> ---

> A program or object file using R_X86_64_8, R_X86_64_16, R_X86_64_PC16

> or R_X86_64_PC8 relocations is not conformant to this ABI, these

> relocations are only added for documentation purposes.

> ---

> 

> Since x86 PC16 relocations were intended for 16-bit programs in an ELF32

> or ELF64 container, PC16 relocation should wrap-around in 16-bit address

> space.


This, to me at least, does not follow from the ABI wording. Or else
the same would apply to PC8.

>  Revert

> 

> commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd

> Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

> Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

> 

>     x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs


I disagree with this revert, at least as long as there's no clear
plan for an alternative. As long as PC8 and PC16 aren't specifically
called out as _intentionally_ having different behavior, their
behavior ought to match. I do realize that my opinion in such matters
counts next to nothing, but then - at the very least - the test cases
from this commit should be left in place and converted to XFAILs, to
make obvious that there is something wrong.

> and

> 

> commit 50c95a739c91ae70cf8481936611aa1f5397a384

> Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>

> Date:   Wed May 26 12:13:13 2021 -0700

> 

>     x86: Propery check PC16 reloc overflow in 16-bit mode instructions

> 

> while keeping PR ld/27905 tests for PC16 relocation in 16-bit programs.


Interestingly you keep this commit's test cases.

Jan
Jan Beulich via Binutils May 28, 2021, 11:40 a.m. | #2
On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:48 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>

> On 27.05.2021 19:38, H.J. Lu wrote:

> > The x86-64 psABI has

> >

> > ---

> > A program or object file using R_X86_64_8, R_X86_64_16, R_X86_64_PC16

> > or R_X86_64_PC8 relocations is not conformant to this ABI, these

> > relocations are only added for documentation purposes.

> > ---

> >

> > Since x86 PC16 relocations were intended for 16-bit programs in an ELF32

> > or ELF64 container, PC16 relocation should wrap-around in 16-bit address

> > space.

>

> This, to me at least, does not follow from the ABI wording. Or else

> the same would apply to PC8.


Since x86 doesn't support 8-bit mode, PC8 is different from PC16.

> >  Revert

> >

> > commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd

> > Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

> > Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

> >

> >     x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs

>

> I disagree with this revert, at least as long as there's no clear

> plan for an alternative. As long as PC8 and PC16 aren't specifically

> called out as _intentionally_ having different behavior, their


PC16 is different and used for 16-bit programs.

> behavior ought to match. I do realize that my opinion in such matters

> counts next to nothing, but then - at the very least - the test cases

> from this commit should be left in place and converted to XFAILs, to

> make obvious that there is something wrong.


I will leave them XFAIL.

> > and

> >

> > commit 50c95a739c91ae70cf8481936611aa1f5397a384

> > Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>

> > Date:   Wed May 26 12:13:13 2021 -0700

> >

> >     x86: Propery check PC16 reloc overflow in 16-bit mode instructions

> >

> > while keeping PR ld/27905 tests for PC16 relocation in 16-bit programs.

>

> Interestingly you keep this commit's test cases.

>


This is to make sure that we don't break 16-bit programs.

-- 
H.J.
Jan Beulich via Binutils May 28, 2021, 11:56 a.m. | #3
On 28.05.2021 13:40, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:48 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>>

>> On 27.05.2021 19:38, H.J. Lu wrote:

>>> The x86-64 psABI has

>>>

>>> ---

>>> A program or object file using R_X86_64_8, R_X86_64_16, R_X86_64_PC16

>>> or R_X86_64_PC8 relocations is not conformant to this ABI, these

>>> relocations are only added for documentation purposes.

>>> ---

>>>

>>> Since x86 PC16 relocations were intended for 16-bit programs in an ELF32

>>> or ELF64 container, PC16 relocation should wrap-around in 16-bit address

>>> space.

>>

>> This, to me at least, does not follow from the ABI wording. Or else

>> the same would apply to PC8.

> 

> Since x86 doesn't support 8-bit mode, PC8 is different from PC16.

> 

>>>  Revert

>>>

>>> commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd

>>> Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

>>> Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

>>>

>>>     x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs

>>

>> I disagree with this revert, at least as long as there's no clear

>> plan for an alternative. As long as PC8 and PC16 aren't specifically

>> called out as _intentionally_ having different behavior, their

> 

> PC16 is different and used for 16-bit programs.


PC8 when used by 16-bit programs is also different from PC8 when
used by 32- or 64-bit ones. Yet one and the same relocation shouldn't
have different meaning.

Jan
Jan Beulich via Binutils May 28, 2021, 12:05 p.m. | #4
On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 4:56 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>

> On 28.05.2021 13:40, H.J. Lu wrote:

> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:48 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:

> >>

> >> On 27.05.2021 19:38, H.J. Lu wrote:

> >>> The x86-64 psABI has

> >>>

> >>> ---

> >>> A program or object file using R_X86_64_8, R_X86_64_16, R_X86_64_PC16

> >>> or R_X86_64_PC8 relocations is not conformant to this ABI, these

> >>> relocations are only added for documentation purposes.

> >>> ---

> >>>

> >>> Since x86 PC16 relocations were intended for 16-bit programs in an ELF32

> >>> or ELF64 container, PC16 relocation should wrap-around in 16-bit address

> >>> space.

> >>

> >> This, to me at least, does not follow from the ABI wording. Or else

> >> the same would apply to PC8.

> >

> > Since x86 doesn't support 8-bit mode, PC8 is different from PC16.

> >

> >>>  Revert

> >>>

> >>> commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd

> >>> Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

> >>> Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

> >>>

> >>>     x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs

> >>

> >> I disagree with this revert, at least as long as there's no clear

> >> plan for an alternative. As long as PC8 and PC16 aren't specifically

> >> called out as _intentionally_ having different behavior, their

> >

> > PC16 is different and used for 16-bit programs.

>

> PC8 when used by 16-bit programs is also different from PC8 when

> used by 32- or 64-bit ones. Yet one and the same relocation shouldn't

> have different meaning.

>


How is it different? Does binutils use PC8?


-- 
H.J.
Jan Beulich via Binutils May 28, 2021, 12:27 p.m. | #5
On 28.05.2021 14:05, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 4:56 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>> On 28.05.2021 13:40, H.J. Lu wrote:

>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:48 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:

>>>> On 27.05.2021 19:38, H.J. Lu wrote:

>>>>>  Revert

>>>>>

>>>>> commit a7664973b24a242cd9ea17deb5eaf503065fc0bd

>>>>> Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

>>>>> Date:   Mon Apr 26 10:41:35 2021 +0200

>>>>>

>>>>>     x86: correct overflow checking for 16-bit PC-relative relocs

>>>>

>>>> I disagree with this revert, at least as long as there's no clear

>>>> plan for an alternative. As long as PC8 and PC16 aren't specifically

>>>> called out as _intentionally_ having different behavior, their

>>>

>>> PC16 is different and used for 16-bit programs.

>>

>> PC8 when used by 16-bit programs is also different from PC8 when

>> used by 32- or 64-bit ones. Yet one and the same relocation shouldn't

>> have different meaning.

>>

> 

> How is it different? Does binutils use PC8?


Funny you should ask. I've just made two small examples each using
one of the two relocation types to set up a doubly linked list of
objects, with the links optimized for size (i.e. just large enough,
except I'm intentionally adding one too many objects). You'll
observe a relocation overflow with PC8, but not with PC16 (unless
my change is in place which has regressed SeaBIOS). And this is all
data, i.e. could be used in a 64-bit, a 32-bit, or a 16-bit program.

Jan
.text
	.global _start
_start:
	ret

	.macro entry idx, nxt, prv
	.section .rdata\idx, "a", @progbits
e\idx:	.byte e\nxt - ., e\prv - .
	.fill 8, 2, -1
	.size e\idx, . -e\idx
	.type e\idx, @object
	.endm

	entry	0, 1, 9
	entry	1, 2, 0
	entry	2, 4, 1
	entry	4, 8, 2
	entry	8, C, 4
	entry	C, 6, 8
	entry	6, 3, C
	entry	3, 9, 6
	entry	9, 0, 3
.text
	.global _start
_start:
	ret

	.macro entry idx, nxt, prv
	.section .rdata\idx, "a", @progbits
e\idx:	.word e\nxt - ., e\prv - .
	.fill 0x800, 2, -1
	.size e\idx, . -e\idx
	.type e\idx, @object
	.endm

	entry	0, 1, 9
	entry	1, 2, 0
	entry	2, 4, 1
	entry	4, 8, 2
	entry	8, C, 4
	entry	C, 6, 8
	entry	6, 3, C
	entry	3, 9, 6
	entry	9, 0, 3

Patch

diff --git a/bfd/elf32-i386.c b/bfd/elf32-i386.c
index c68741af02c..cf7cd076b17 100644
--- a/bfd/elf32-i386.c
+++ b/bfd/elf32-i386.c
@@ -22,7 +22,6 @@ 
 #include "elf-vxworks.h"
 #include "dwarf2.h"
 #include "opcode/i386.h"
-#include "libiberty.h"
 
 /* 386 uses REL relocations instead of RELA.  */
 #define USE_REL	1
@@ -94,7 +93,7 @@  static reloc_howto_type elf_howto_table[]=
   HOWTO(R_386_16, 0, 1, 16, false, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_386_16",
 	true, 0xffff, 0xffff, false),
-  HOWTO(R_386_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_signed,
+  HOWTO(R_386_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_386_PC16",
 	true, 0xffff, 0xffff, true),
   HOWTO(R_386_8, 0, 0, 8, false, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
@@ -176,14 +175,10 @@  static reloc_howto_type elf_howto_table[]=
 	 false,			/* partial_inplace */
 	 0,			/* src_mask */
 	 0,			/* dst_mask */
-	 false),		/* pcrel_offset */
+	 false)			/* pcrel_offset */
 
 #define R_386_vt (R_386_GNU_VTENTRY + 1 - R_386_vt_offset)
 
-/* Use complain_overflow_bitfield on R_386_PC16 for code16.  */
-  HOWTO(R_386_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
-	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_386_PC16",
-	true, 0xffff, 0xffff, true)
 };
 
 #define X86_PCREL_TYPE_P(TYPE) ((TYPE) == R_386_PC32)
@@ -374,7 +369,7 @@  elf_i386_reloc_name_lookup (bfd *abfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
 }
 
 static reloc_howto_type *
-elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (bfd *abfd, unsigned r_type)
+elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (unsigned r_type)
 {
   unsigned int indx;
 
@@ -389,11 +384,6 @@  elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (bfd *abfd, unsigned r_type)
   /* PR 17512: file: 0f67f69d.  */
   if (elf_howto_table [indx].type != r_type)
     return NULL;
-
-  /* Use complain_overflow_bitfield on R_386_PC16 for code16.  */
-  if (r_type == (unsigned int) R_386_PC16 && elf_x86_has_code16 (abfd))
-    indx = ARRAY_SIZE (elf_howto_table) - 1;
-
   return &elf_howto_table[indx];
 }
 
@@ -404,8 +394,7 @@  elf_i386_info_to_howto_rel (bfd *abfd,
 {
   unsigned int r_type = ELF32_R_TYPE (dst->r_info);
 
-  if ((cache_ptr->howto = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (abfd, r_type))
-      == NULL)
+  if ((cache_ptr->howto = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (r_type)) == NULL)
     {
       /* xgettext:c-format */
       _bfd_error_handler (_("%pB: unsupported relocation type %#x"),
@@ -1153,8 +1142,8 @@  elf_i386_tls_transition (struct bfd_link_info *info, bfd *abfd,
       reloc_howto_type *from, *to;
       const char *name;
 
-      from = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (abfd, from_type);
-      to = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (abfd, to_type);
+      from = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (from_type);
+      to = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (to_type);
 
       if (h)
 	name = h->root.root.string;
@@ -2085,7 +2074,7 @@  elf_i386_relocate_section (bfd *output_bfd,
 	  continue;
 	}
 
-      howto = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (input_bfd, r_type);
+      howto = elf_i386_rtype_to_howto (r_type);
       if (howto == NULL)
 	return _bfd_unrecognized_reloc (input_bfd, input_section, r_type);
 
diff --git a/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c b/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c
index d420561c156..98fb88113c0 100644
--- a/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c
+++ b/bfd/elf64-x86-64.c
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@  static reloc_howto_type x86_64_elf_howto_table[] =
 	false),
   HOWTO(R_X86_64_16, 0, 1, 16, false, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_X86_64_16", false, 0, 0xffff, false),
-  HOWTO(R_X86_64_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_signed,
+  HOWTO(R_X86_64_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_X86_64_PC16", false, 0, 0xffff, true),
   HOWTO(R_X86_64_8, 0, 0, 8, false, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_X86_64_8", false, 0, 0xff, false),
@@ -187,10 +187,6 @@  static reloc_howto_type x86_64_elf_howto_table[] =
 	 _bfd_elf_rel_vtable_reloc_fn, "R_X86_64_GNU_VTENTRY", false, 0, 0,
 	 false),
 
-/* Use complain_overflow_bitfield on R_X86_64_PC16 for code16.  */
-  HOWTO(R_X86_64_PC16, 0, 1, 16, true, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
-	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_X86_64_PC16", false, 0, 0xffff, true),
-
 /* Use complain_overflow_bitfield on R_X86_64_32 for x32.  */
   HOWTO(R_X86_64_32, 0, 2, 32, false, 0, complain_overflow_bitfield,
 	bfd_elf_generic_reloc, "R_X86_64_32", false, 0, 0xffffffff,
@@ -274,14 +270,6 @@  elf_x86_64_rtype_to_howto (bfd *abfd, unsigned r_type)
       else
 	i = ARRAY_SIZE (x86_64_elf_howto_table) - 1;
     }
-  else if (r_type == (unsigned int) R_X86_64_PC16)
-    {
-      /* Use complain_overflow_bitfield on R_X86_64_PC16 for code16.  */
-      if (elf_x86_has_code16 (abfd))
-	i = ARRAY_SIZE (x86_64_elf_howto_table) - 2;
-      else
-	i = r_type;
-    }
   else if (r_type < (unsigned int) R_X86_64_GNU_VTINHERIT
 	   || r_type >= (unsigned int) R_X86_64_max)
     {
diff --git a/bfd/elfxx-x86.c b/bfd/elfxx-x86.c
index 29dc7f04b4d..62d516aab8d 100644
--- a/bfd/elfxx-x86.c
+++ b/bfd/elfxx-x86.c
@@ -2353,7 +2353,6 @@  _bfd_x86_elf_parse_gnu_properties (bfd *abfd, unsigned int type,
       || (type >= GNU_PROPERTY_X86_UINT32_OR_AND_LO
 	  && type <= GNU_PROPERTY_X86_UINT32_OR_AND_HI))
     {
-      unsigned int number;
       if (datasz != 4)
 	{
 	  _bfd_error_handler
@@ -2362,13 +2361,7 @@  _bfd_x86_elf_parse_gnu_properties (bfd *abfd, unsigned int type,
 	  return property_corrupt;
 	}
       prop = _bfd_elf_get_property (abfd, type, datasz);
-      number = bfd_h_get_32 (abfd, ptr);
-      if ((abfd->flags
-	   & (DYNAMIC | BFD_LINKER_CREATED | BFD_PLUGIN)) == 0
-	  && type == GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_USED
-	  && (number & GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16) != 0)
-	elf_x86_has_code16 (abfd) = 1;
-      prop->u.number |= number;
+      prop->u.number |= bfd_h_get_32 (abfd, ptr);
       prop->pr_kind = property_number;
       return property_number;
     }
diff --git a/bfd/elfxx-x86.h b/bfd/elfxx-x86.h
index e8344305492..db11327e96f 100644
--- a/bfd/elfxx-x86.h
+++ b/bfd/elfxx-x86.h
@@ -549,9 +549,6 @@  struct elf_x86_obj_tdata
 
   /* GOTPLT entries for TLS descriptors.  */
   bfd_vma *local_tlsdesc_gotent;
-
-  /* Set if the objec file has 16-bit code.  */
-  unsigned int has_code16 : 1;
 };
 
 enum elf_x86_plt_type
@@ -587,9 +584,6 @@  struct elf_x86_plt
 #define elf_x86_local_tlsdesc_gotent(abfd) \
   (elf_x86_tdata (abfd)->local_tlsdesc_gotent)
 
-#define elf_x86_has_code16(abfd) \
-  (elf_x86_tdata (abfd)->has_code16)
-
 #define elf_x86_compute_jump_table_size(htab) \
   ((htab)->elf.srelplt->reloc_count * (htab)->got_entry_size)
 
diff --git a/binutils/readelf.c b/binutils/readelf.c
index a6ed24c03bd..d773b9a4931 100644
--- a/binutils/readelf.c
+++ b/binutils/readelf.c
@@ -19139,9 +19139,6 @@  decode_x86_feature_2 (unsigned int bitmask)
 	case GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_XSAVEC:
 	  printf ("XSAVEC");
 	  break;
-	case GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16:
-	  printf ("CODE16");
-	  break;
 	default:
 	  printf (_("<unknown: %x>"), bit);
 	  break;
diff --git a/gas/config/tc-i386.c b/gas/config/tc-i386.c
index c17f4da16fe..d3441988e34 100644
--- a/gas/config/tc-i386.c
+++ b/gas/config/tc-i386.c
@@ -2695,10 +2695,6 @@  static void
 set_code_flag (int value)
 {
   update_code_flag (value, 0);
-#if defined (OBJ_ELF) || defined (OBJ_MAYBE_ELF)
-  if (value == CODE_16BIT)
-    x86_feature_2_used |= GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16;
-#endif
 }
 
 static void
@@ -2710,10 +2706,6 @@  set_16bit_gcc_code_flag (int new_code_flag)
   cpu_arch_flags.bitfield.cpu64 = 0;
   cpu_arch_flags.bitfield.cpuno64 = 1;
   stackop_size = LONG_MNEM_SUFFIX;
-#if defined (OBJ_ELF) || defined (OBJ_MAYBE_ELF)
-  if (new_code_flag == CODE_16BIT)
-    x86_feature_2_used |= GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16;
-#endif
 }
 
 static void
@@ -9040,7 +9032,7 @@  x86_cleanup (void)
   unsigned int isa_1_descsz_raw, feature_2_descsz_raw;
   unsigned int padding;
 
-  if (!IS_ELF || (!x86_used_note && !x86_feature_2_used))
+  if (!IS_ELF || !x86_used_note)
     return;
 
   x86_feature_2_used |= GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_X86;
@@ -9080,23 +9072,15 @@  x86_cleanup (void)
   bfd_set_section_alignment (sec, alignment);
   elf_section_type (sec) = SHT_NOTE;
 
-  if (x86_used_note)
-    {
-      /* GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED: 4-byte type + 4-byte data size
-	 + 4-byte data  */
-      isa_1_descsz_raw = 4 + 4 + 4;
-      /* Align GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED.  */
-      isa_1_descsz = (isa_1_descsz_raw + align_size_1) & ~align_size_1;
-    }
-  else
-    {
-      isa_1_descsz_raw = 0;
-      isa_1_descsz = 0;
-    }
+  /* GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED: 4-byte type + 4-byte data size
+				  + 4-byte data  */
+  isa_1_descsz_raw = 4 + 4 + 4;
+  /* Align GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED.  */
+  isa_1_descsz = (isa_1_descsz_raw + align_size_1) & ~align_size_1;
 
   feature_2_descsz_raw = isa_1_descsz;
   /* GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_USED: 4-byte type + 4-byte data size
-     + 4-byte data  */
+				      + 4-byte data  */
   feature_2_descsz_raw += 4 + 4 + 4;
   /* Align GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_USED.  */
   feature_2_descsz = ((feature_2_descsz_raw + align_size_1)
@@ -9118,23 +9102,20 @@  x86_cleanup (void)
   /* Write n_name.  */
   memcpy (p + 4 * 3, "GNU", 4);
 
-  if (isa_1_descsz != 0)
-    {
-      /* Write 4-byte type.  */
-      md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 4,
-			  (valueT) GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED, 4);
+  /* Write 4-byte type.  */
+  md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 4,
+		      (valueT) GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_USED, 4);
 
-      /* Write 4-byte data size.  */
-      md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 5, (valueT) 4, 4);
+  /* Write 4-byte data size.  */
+  md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 5, (valueT) 4, 4);
 
-      /* Write 4-byte data.  */
-      md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 6, (valueT) x86_isa_1_used, 4);
+  /* Write 4-byte data.  */
+  md_number_to_chars (p + 4 * 6, (valueT) x86_isa_1_used, 4);
 
-      /* Zero out paddings.  */
-      padding = isa_1_descsz - isa_1_descsz_raw;
-      if (padding)
-	memset (p + 4 * 7, 0, padding);
-    }
+  /* Zero out paddings.  */
+  padding = isa_1_descsz - isa_1_descsz_raw;
+  if (padding)
+    memset (p + 4 * 7, 0, padding);
 
   /* Write 4-byte type.  */
   md_number_to_chars (p + isa_1_descsz + 4 * 4,
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d
index 37b66c85f4e..f18c8cd62da 100644
--- a/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/code16-2.d
@@ -1,8 +1,3 @@ 
 #name: i386 code16 2
 #as: -mx86-used-note=no --generate-missing-build-notes=no
 #readelf: -n
-
-Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.property
-[ 	]+Owner[ 	]+Data size[ 	]+Description
-  GNU                  0x[0-9a-f]+	NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0
-      Properties: x86 feature used: x86, CODE16
diff --git a/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d
index dbabd67e888..5052353c00d 100644
--- a/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d
+++ b/gas/testsuite/gas/i386/x86-64-code16-2.d
@@ -2,8 +2,3 @@ 
 #name: x86-64 code16 2
 #as: -mx86-used-note=no --generate-missing-build-notes=no
 #readelf: -n
-
-Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.property
-[ 	]+Owner[ 	]+Data size[ 	]+Description
-  GNU                  0x[0-9a-f]+	NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0
-      Properties: x86 feature used: x86, CODE16
diff --git a/include/elf/common.h b/include/elf/common.h
index 564ab711a20..24d0a09b7c8 100644
--- a/include/elf/common.h
+++ b/include/elf/common.h
@@ -872,7 +872,6 @@ 
 #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_XSAVEC	(1U << 9)
 #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_TMM		(1U << 10)
 #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_MASK		(1U << 11)
-#define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_2_CODE16	(1U << 12)
 
 #define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_COMPAT_2_ISA_1_NEEDED \
   (GNU_PROPERTY_X86_UINT32_OR_LO + 0)
diff --git a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp b/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp
index 3d6047b790d..4cb5c3a095c 100644
--- a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp
+++ b/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/i386.exp
@@ -297,7 +297,6 @@  run_dump_test "abs"
 run_dump_test "pcrel8"
 run_dump_test "pcrel16"
 run_dump_test "pcrel16abs"
-run_dump_test "pcrel16-2"
 run_dump_test "alloc"
 run_dump_test "warn1"
 run_dump_test "tlsgd2"
diff --git a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d b/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d
deleted file mode 100644
index c1c340fc75c..00000000000
--- a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.d
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@ 
-#name: PCREL16 overflow (2)
-#as: --32
-#ld: -melf_i386
-#error: .*relocation truncated to fit: R_386_PC16 .*t16.*
-#error: .*relocation truncated to fit: R_386_PC16 .*_start.*
diff --git a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s b/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s
deleted file mode 100644
index 2e974175ae8..00000000000
--- a/ld/testsuite/ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@ 
-	.text
-	.global _start
-_start:
-	data16 xbegin t16
-	ret
-
-	.fill 0x8000,1,0xcc
-
-	.global t16
-t16:
-	data16 xbegin _start
-	ret
diff --git a/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d b/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d
deleted file mode 100644
index 5346a5b619d..00000000000
--- a/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/pcrel16-2.d
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,5 +0,0 @@ 
-#name: PCREL16 overflow (2)
-#source: ../ld-i386/pcrel16-2.s
-#ld:
-#error: .*relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC16 .*t16.*
-#error: .*relocation truncated to fit: R_X86_64_PC16 .*_start.*
diff --git a/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp b/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp
index 80716668df6..5efc215a1a7 100644
--- a/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp
+++ b/ld/testsuite/ld-x86-64/x86-64.exp
@@ -261,7 +261,6 @@  run_dump_test "abs-l1om"
 run_dump_test "apic"
 run_dump_test "pcrel8"
 run_dump_test "pcrel16"
-run_dump_test "pcrel16-2"
 run_dump_test "rela"
 run_dump_test "tlsgd2"
 run_dump_test "tlsgd3"