On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 9:16 PM Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 4:55 AM Kevin Kofler via devel <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Daan De Meyer via devel wrote: >> > Which shows a smaller than 1% slowdown between the binary built with frame >> > pointers and the binary built without frame pointers. >> >> I am still strongly opposed to degrading performance and size for all users >> just to help the handful users of poorly-designed profiling tools. >> > > I am coming a bit late to this discussion, but I would like to inject the viewpoint that 'performance' (however defined) > isn't the only criterion by which we should just judge what Fedora produces. At least for Fedora Workstation, being > a useful system for developers with working debugging and profiling tools should have some weight too. > > And I doubt that you'd be able to notice a 'smaller than 1% slowdown' on your system. I see one big problem with this argument - it is coloured from the point of view of a (C) developer. While software developers know how to - and are able to, if they need to - recompile libraries to make them better suitable for profiling, normal users don't know how to do that (if they even have beefy enough hardware to make this possible to do for them, at all). And if we say this argument is valid, then should we also build all our packages with ASAN / TSAN / etc. instrumentation, as well? It would make developing and debugging safety-critical software with AddressSanitizer etc. *much* easier on Fedora, even it will make everything run "a bit" slower. (Yes, I know that this is a "slippery-slope argument", but I liked the comparison of this proposed Change with using ASAN / TSAN / etc. instrumentation just too much to not include it here.) I don't want Fedora to become a less good "general-purpose linux distribution" just to make it a better environment for a small share (those who need to do profiling against *system libraries*) of a small share of the target audience (developers). We can probably count the number of people who want to profile their software running on top of Fedora libraries on one (or at most, two) hands, but we have hundreds of thousands of users who would be negatively impacted by this change - even if by a little bit, and of course, those changes add up over time, as well. Workstation is not the only edition of Fedora, and developers are not the only target audience. Developers who run profiling tools against libraries from Fedora packages are even fewer people. I assume that making binaries bigger (?) and make them run less efficiently would have a bigger impact for some other target audiences, especially the IoT space, where CPUs are less powerful (and have fewer available registers). All editions and spins build on top of the same packages from Fedora repositories, and making them less fit for purpose for everybody "just" to make sampling-based profiling work better for a few people does not seem like a worthwhile trade-off to me. Fabio _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
