Re: [committed] exec-stack warning for test which wants executable stacks

[Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>]

On 4/25/2022 8:37 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
>
>
> On 4/25/2022 6:56 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>
>>> I used -z execstack rather than --no-warn-execstack as the former is 
>>> recognized by older versions of ld, but the latter is a new option.
>> Thanks for it.
> Unfortunately, I should have looked at the other failures that have 
> popped up over the last week.  Essentially all the nested function 
> tests are failing on some targets due to the same linker warning.
>
> Either pruning or adding  the option to all those tests is going to be 
> necessary ;(
And -z execstack is not universally accepted either.  In fact, we even 
have some elf targets that don't support it due to oversights (?) in 
their linker configurations.  But the key thing AFAICT is that -z 
execstack is an ELF specific flag (I didn't know that until just now).  
So we can't really depend on it across the board.  In fact, I wouldn't 
be surprised if AIX has regressed on the one file I adjusted earlier.

So I think that means we're stuck with the less desirable option of 
pruning the output.  I'll take care of it and reverting the change that 
added -z execstack to the one test.

jeff