Suppress warning about stack_base_ptr with late-model GCC.

GCC 12 complains that set_stack_base is storing the address of
a local variable in a long-lived pointer.  This is an entirely
reasonable warning (indeed, it just helped us find a bug);
but that behavior is intentional here.  We can work around it
by using __builtin_frame_address(0) instead of a specific local
variable; that produces an address a dozen or so bytes different,
in my testing, but we don't care about such a small difference.
Maybe someday a compiler lacking that function will start to issue
a similar warning, but we'll worry about that when it happens.

Patch by me, per a suggestion from Andres Freund.  Back-patch to
v12, which is as far back as the patch will go without some pain.
(Recently-established project policy would permit a back-patch as
far as 9.2, but I'm disinclined to expend the work until GCC 12
is much more widespread.)

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/3773792.1645141467@sss.pgh.pa.us

config/c-compiler.m4

@@ -381,6 +381,28 @@ fi])# PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC
 
 
 
+# PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC_PTR
+# -----------------------
+# Like PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC, except that the function is assumed to
+# return a pointer type, and the argument(s) should be given literally.
+# This handles some cases that PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC doesn't.
+AC_DEFUN([PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC_PTR],
+[AC_CACHE_CHECK(for $1, pgac_cv$1,
+[AC_LINK_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([
+void *
+call$1(void)
+{
+    return $1($2);
+}], [])],
+[pgac_cv$1=yes],
+[pgac_cv$1=no])])
+if test x"${pgac_cv$1}" = xyes ; then
+AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED(AS_TR_CPP([HAVE$1]), 1,
+                   [Define to 1 if your compiler understands $1.])
+fi])# PGAC_CHECK_BUILTIN_FUNC_PTR
+
+
+
 # PGAC_PROG_VARCC_VARFLAGS_OPT
 # ----------------------------
 # Given a compiler, variable name and a string, check if the compiler