Reject test executables when not supported by target

[thaliaarchi]

Currently, compiling tests for SOLID produces an ICE, because SOLID does not support executables.

See #138047

[rustbot]

r? @estebank

rustbot has assigned @estebank.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[thaliaarchi]

r? @bjorn3, since you helped triage #138047

[bjorn3]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 59e5920 has been approved by bjorn3

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 59e5920 with merge 414da5b...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: bjorn3
Pushing 414da5b to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 40dacd5 (parent) -> 414da5b (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

Job duration changes

1. x86_64-apple-2: 6595.0s -> 5234.8s (-20.6%)
2. x86_64-gnu-distcheck: 4460.8s -> 5034.4s (12.9%)
3. dist-aarch64-apple: 4437.0s -> 4898.8s (10.4%)
4. dist-apple-various: 7712.8s -> 6964.3s (-9.7%)
5. x86_64-apple-1: 8366.4s -> 7584.6s (-9.3%)
6. dist-x86_64-apple: 8724.0s -> 9494.0s (8.8%)
7. dist-x86_64-msvc: 6154.0s -> 5647.0s (-8.2%)
8. x86_64-mingw-2: 6804.1s -> 7337.5s (7.8%)
9. x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-2: 6348.1s -> 5868.5s (-7.6%)
10. dist-powerpc-linux: 5568.7s -> 5161.5s (-7.3%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (414da5b): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.7%, secondary 2.6%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-0.9%, -0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-0.9%, -0.5%]	2

Cycles

Results (primary -0.3%, secondary -6.4%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.5%	[0.5%, 0.5%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.7%, -0.5%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-6.4%	[-6.4%, -6.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.3%	[-0.7%, 0.5%]	4

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 781.212s -> 782.201s (0.13%)
Artifact size: 365.11 MiB -> 365.14 MiB (0.01%)