[PATCH v2] elf: Don't set .note.GNU-stack type to SHT_NOTE

[Jan Beulich]

On 13.01.2026 18:33, Michael Matz wrote:
> There are more warts of .note.GNU-stack that need at least a little 
> pondering:
> (a) the usage of section flags to convey information, i.e. being 
>     SHF_EXECINSTR to mean needing an executable stack.
>     It's slightly surprising to find such flag on a SHT_NOTE section.
>     (And what does it mean for the resulting PT_NOTE segment?)
> (b) in .s files the .note.GNU-stack section is often generated by
>     .section .note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits
>     it may be surprising if the resulting .o file has a SHT_NOTE type,
>     instead of the explicitely requested SHT_PROGBITS

Experimentally, if --{,no}execstack is passed, it'll be NOTE irrespective
of the @progbits. But the combination of command line option and section
directive isn't overly well defined anyway, as the "exec" parts
accumulate. Without the command line option it'll continue to be PROGBITS.

> I think none of those would hinder the usage of SHT_NOTE for 
> .note.GNU-stack.  (a) shouldn't pose a problem anywhere, and the surprise 
> is very limited.

Well, for people using --execstack that would mean an extra chunk of
executable "code" (really data). The same would have happened to them
before the change though, unless they special-cased .note.GNU-stack in
their linker scripts.

>  For (b) the asm directive should probably continue to 
> then make the gnu-stack section be SHT_PROGBITS, but either way the link 
> editor needs to continue accepting PROGBITS .note.GNU-stack anyway, as a 
> compatility measure.

Of course.

Jan