From: Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com>
To: "Clément Chigot" <chigot@adacore.com>
Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com>, binutils@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ld: harmonize the value of --enable-warn-execstack=no option
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 19:46:10 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yodqagtj541XFsJo@squeak.grove.modra.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ307EiODo2YZSFTgkOs5igW581S4wbmQ-qGGuC4E1w7QMi8fQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 09:07:06AM +0200, Clément Chigot wrote:
> However, the testsuite changes look mandatory to me.
> As of now, the results are different dependending on the
> configure options being passed.
Yes, you may well be correct. I'm going to leave this to Nick.
Incidentally, the reason why I didn't fix the arm/aarch64 regressions
is that if
link_info.separate_code = DEFAULT_LD_Z_SEPARATE_CODE;
link_info.warn_execstack = DEFAULT_LD_WARN_EXECSTACK;
link_info.no_warn_rwx_segments = ! DEFAULT_LD_WARN_RWX_SEGMENTS;
link_info.default_execstack = DEFAULT_LD_EXECSTACK;
is added to armelf.em:before_parse then we get
FAIL: PR ld/29072 (ignore absent .note.GNU-stack)
The reason being that arm is listed in ld/testsuite/ld-elf/elf.exp
target_defaults_to_execstack but doesn't have
elf_backend_default_execstack set.
> If the warnings are disabled, ld/29072 will always fail.
> If the warnings are forced, stack exec will fail too.
>
> I agree that forcing --warn-execstack might not be the
> right approach.
> Maybe disabling the problematic tests and creating
> new ones: tests that are run only when a given
> configure option is set, would be better. That way
> we can also check that the behavior of each configure
> choice is preserved.
>
> Clément
--
Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-20 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-17 12:51 Clément Chigot
2022-05-20 5:54 ` Alan Modra
2022-05-20 6:45 ` Alan Modra
2022-05-20 7:07 ` Clément Chigot
2022-05-20 10:16 ` Alan Modra [this message]
2022-05-26 11:06 ` bit-rot in target before_parse function option Alan Modra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Yodqagtj541XFsJo@squeak.grove.modra.org \
--to=amodra@gmail.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=chigot@adacore.com \
--cc=nickc@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).