On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 10:31:09PM +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:

On Tue, 2023-12-05 at 16:43 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

If the x86 toolchain/libc support is widely enough deployed (or you
just
don't mind any missing coverage) we could use the toolchain support
there and only have the manual enable for arm64, it'd be inconsistent
but not wildly so.

I'm hoping there is not too much of a gap before the glibc support
starts filtering out. Long term, elf bit enabling is probably the right
thing for the generic tests. Short term, manual enabling is ok with me
if no one else minds. Maybe we could add my "don't do" list as a
comment if we do manual enabling?

Probably good to write it up somewhere, yes - it'd also be useful for
anyone off doing their own non-libc things.  It did cross my mind to
try to make a document for the generic bit of the ABI for shadow stacks.

I'll have to check your new series, but I also wonder if we could cram
the manual enabling and status checking pieces into some headers and
not have to have "if x86" "if arm" logic in the test themselves.

I did think about that but was worried that a header might encourage
more users doing the hacky thing.  OTOH it would mean the arch specific
tests could share the header though so perhaps you're right, I'll take a
look.