On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 5:53 PM Kevin Kofler via devel
<devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> * It made wrong assumptions about the performance impact of
> _FORTIFY_SOURCE=3, which, compared to the already existing (!)
> _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2, appears to actually have NO performance impact at all
> (!), only compared to no _FORTIFY_SOURCE at all.
Your larger point is correct (and what I've been talking about too)
but for the sake of accuracy: there is no known overhead due to
_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 either AFAIK; there's one publicly available
analysis[1] that shows a minor speedup (!) in ffmpeg due to
_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2. The ~1.3% overhead I mentioned was for
"-fstack-protector-strong -fstack-clash-protection
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE={2,3} -D_GLIBCBXX_ASSERTIONS" and IMO it should
mainly be attributed to -fstack-protector-strong
-fstack-clash-protection and perhaps -D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS.
Thanks,
Sid
[1] https://zatoichi-engineer.github.io/2017/10/06/fortify-source.html
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
