Re: F38 proposal: Add _FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 to distribution build flags (System-Wide Change proposal)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 7:50 AM Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 5:53 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 3:17 PM Gary Buhrmaster
> > <gary.buhrmaster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 7:58 PM Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Add_FORTIFY_SOURCE%3D3_to_distribution_build_flags
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is my vague recollection (I could easily be wrong, so
> > > correct me as appropriate) that _FORTIFY_SOURCE=3
> > > adds some runtime overhead that did not apply in
> > > previous levels.
> > >
> > > If that is correct, has the potential performance impact
> > > been evaluated and documented somewhere?  And, if
> > > correct, the change proposal should probably be modified
> > > to mention the potential performance impacts.
> >
> > It has a similar impact that turning back on frame pointers would.
> >
> > Cf. https://developers.redhat.com/articles/2022/09/17/gccs-new-fortification-level#the_gains_of_improved_security_coverage_outweigh_the_cost
> >
> > I'm extremely displeased now, as the toolchain team basically told us
> > they wouldn't accept register pressure on x86_64 and then turned
> > around and made a proposal that does the same thing. Apparently
> > quality of life improvements for developers and real-time tracing
> > (e.g. making bpftrace useful) isn't worth it, but this is.
> >
> > I want a really good justification for not doing both at the same time
> > if we're going to accept this.
>
> They're only similar to the extent of potentially having a performance
> impact.  One may improve debugging experience while the other improves
> security mitigation coverage by a factor of 2.4x in the average case
> and 5-10x in some key cases.
>

"may improve" is proven to be "does improve significantly". We had
GNOME and other desktop software developers and hyperscale developers
telling us it would be helpful to have. Entire classes of tracing and
debugging tools *don't work* without frame pointers.

I say that the impact is about equal, just in different areas, with
the same kind of performance hit.

(But who cares about developers, I guess?)

> They're apples and butter chicken.
>

Well, okay then, that's one I hadn't heard before. :P




--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux