https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83087
--- Comment #6 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to igor.v.tsimbalist from comment #4) > Yes, that's true. It was done deliberately so the libraries get ready for > Intel CET, it was reflected in commit message and changelog. The binaries > compiled with CET will continue to work on HW without CET support. Why it > should not be enabled by default? Because it bloats the binaries unnecessary? Not sure about the additional run-time cost on non CET chips. I guess most gcc users don't have CET capable hardware.
