On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 10:20 PM Gary Buhrmaster <gary.buhrmaster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 10:53 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 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 > > > > That article explicitly states: > "We need a proper study of performance and code size to understand > the magnitude of the impact" > > I look forward to seeing the results of that proper study before > this is even considered for approval (since, after all, one of the > strong push-backs for -fno-omit-frame-pointer was performance). Besides the point that the two are not comparable, code size results are in the sheet I linked to in the proposal; there's no negative impact. The feature has been enabled by default in OpenSUSE for nearly a year and there have been no noticeable performance issues reported there either. IMO the magnitude of improvement is such that a benchmark shouldn't be a blocker for this feature, but if that's what FESCO insists, I'll be happy to run whatever benchmark they suggest. Sid _______________________________________________ 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
