On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 06:05:29PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-03-12 at 17:19 +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 10:53:08PM +0000, Sam James wrote:
> > > With _FORTIFY_SOURCE >= 2 (enabled by -fhardened), vfprintf-chk-1.c's
> > > __vfprintf_chk ends up calling __vprintf_chk rather than vprintf.
>
> Do we really want to support adding random CFLAGS running the test
> suite?
Random flags certainly not, but some flags should be supported and are very
useful.
We already support the various ABI changing options (-m32 -m64 -mx32 and
the like) and ISA options in there (-march=whatever, -msse2, etc.),
and testing with -fstack-protector-strong is what some distros do for years,
testing with -fhardened is desirable if pretty much everything in the
distros is built with that flag.
Another thing is using --param whatever=whatever in the target_board flags,
or -fno-tree-dce etc. that may or might not work and user needs to be
prepared there will be extra fails.
Jakub
