elf | convenience functions for large-scale bio

It simply means that the iot_thread ask stack size is not sufficient. [...] Is this the only reason why this error comes or can there be another reason for this?

Either it is insufficient you your stack usage is excessive (due to recursion error or instantiation of instantiation of large objects or arrays. Either way the cause is the same. Whether it is due insufficient stack or excessive stack usage is a matter of design an intent.

If yes then where should I increase the stack size of the iot_thread task?

The stack for a thread is assigned in the task creation function. For a dynamically allocated stack that would be the xTaskCreate() call usStackDepth parameter:

Is it possible to do this?

Yes: add -u main to your link line.

To understand what's wrong with your command line, read this or this.

Your gadget is at 0x55555558f8.

Ropper shows the addresses of gadgets the way the ELF header describes the memory layout of the binary. According to that header:

• The file contents 0x0-0xadc are to be mapped as r-x at address 0x0.
• The file contents 0xdb8-0x1048 are to be mapped as rw- at address 0x10db8.

Account for page boundaries and you get one page mapping file offset 0x0 to address 0x0 as executable and two pages mapping file offset 0x0 to address 0x10000 as writeable.

From your GDB dump, these mappings are created at 0x5555555000 and 0x5555565000 in the live process, respectively.

Yes, it is supported. I think the problem is your code, which has a couple of errors:

1. To use the goto feature, you need to start the inline assembly statement with the asm goto keywords. You are missing the goto.

2. The label operands are numbered sequentially after the input operands (and of course there cannot be outputs). So failed is operand 4, and therefore you need to refer to it with bcc %l4, not %l0.

With these changes I'm able to compile the code.

By the way, I don't know much about m68k assembly, but it looks like you are clobbering register d1, along with whatever the _BURAM subroutine clobbers, yet those have not been declared as clobbers. Shouldn't you add "d1" and the rest along with "cc"?

Also, it seems like maybe you are expecting the operands d0_fcode, a0_info, etc, to be put in those specific registers, presumably because _BURAM expects them there. Do you have those variables defined register asm to tell the compiler about that, e.g. register int d0_fcode asm("d0");? Otherwise it could for instance choose d4 for the d0_fcode operand. In my test it happens by chance that they get put in the desired registers, without explicitly asking, but that is not safe to rely on.

It seems you are running a 32 bit ARM Linux (armv7l), you therefore cannot execute a 64 bit aarch64 JDK. You need to install the 32 bit version, the same way you installed the 64 bit JDK, or to install a 64 bit Linux distribution on your system.

The extern "C" makes no difference when declaring variables, it matters only for functions. The reason is that functions in C++ can be overlapped but variables can't.

for example:

Well, I was too fast asking this question, but now, I will answer it too.

1. 40 at the beginning of the addresses in objdump is the hex representation of the char "@", which means "at" and points to an address, very simple!
2. Little Endian has CPU addresses stored in 5 bits instead of 6 or 8. That means, that I should look for the binary value of the objdump code: 11000a94 --> 10001000000000000101010010100, where it can be divided into [10001][00000000000010][10100][10100] with [opcode][value][first address][second address]

Both answers are wrong, see the accepted answer. I will still let them here, though

Have you tried catching std::exception instead of the exception class?

Like this:

This issue is not related to Qt, but related to our own code. We have a module which Gzips all files in a given directory recursively.

However, if the directory path is empty, then original binary's path is taken as a zipping directory. Hence all the object files were zipped and somehow the binary file itself was disappearing.

I have put a necessary check and now this will be avoided.

Thanks to user @G.M. who asked me in the comments section to run command file . From that I got the hint that instead of below output:

ELF 64-bit LSB relocatable, x86-64, version 1

it was giving gzip output:

gzip compressed data, from NTFS filesystem (NT)

This led me to believe that there has to be something with our recently added Gzip mechanism.