https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27397
--- Comment #3 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at inbox dot ru> --- Created attachment 13219 --> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13219&action=edit binutils-gdb-fix-cet.patch We debugged it in https://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=686394 a bit more and managed to work around the failure with: binutils-gdb-fix-cet.patch But it's not a correct patch. Revised explanation of failure mode: 1. toolchain does not support sse2 (good, intended) 2. That leads to enable_cet=no autodetection (good, intended) 3. Then '# Check whether -fcf-protection=none -Wl,-z,ibt,-z,shstk work.' test is ran. 'endbr' instructions are injected (via PLT stubs for shstk?). 4 That makes the test fail with SIGILL when ran on pre-SSE CPUs. 5. have_cet=yes is raised (UNINTENDED). O think 'have_cet=' is shightly misleading. I suggest renaming it to 'requires_cet='. 6 ./configure fails with: if test x$enable_cet = xno -a x$have_cet = xyes; then AC_MSG_ERROR([Intel CET must be enabled on Intel CET enabled host]) fi Another possibility is to turn have_cet=yes to a positive test: if CET can run successfully then enable it (attached patch tries to do it, but incorrectly) (or if disabled CET makes minimal binaries crash?). But it requires more work as './configure --disable-cet' fails with it. Or slightly change your patch to do similar disabling on AC_TRY_RUN side instead. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
