Yes, we do use prelink. I think our use case primarily benefits from CoW memory savings, rather than load times. Of course, GCCPIE can be overridden in the distro layer, but seeing as image-prelink.bbclass still exists upstream, the default definition should support configurations that choose to enable it.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 3:30 AM Alexander Kanavin <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we pretty much abandoned prelink at this point, are you using it > and do you see the benefits? > > Alex > > On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 at 04:30, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Since a prelinked rootfs is in conflict with PIE, don't attempt the latter >> if the image enables prelink. >> --- >> meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc >> b/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc >> index e469eadca1..be6feb9e5f 100644 >> --- a/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc >> +++ b/meta/conf/distro/include/security_flags.inc >> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ >> # From a Yocto Project perspective, this file is included and tested >> # in the DISTRO="poky" configuration. >> >> -GCCPIE ?= "--enable-default-pie" >> +GCCPIE ?= "${@bb.utils.contains('USER_CLASSES', 'image-prelink', >> '--disable-default-pie', '--enable-default-pie', d)}" >> # If static PIE is known to work well, GLIBCPIE="--enable-static-pie" >> can be set >> >> # _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires -O1 or higher, so disable in debug builds as >> they use >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> >> >> >> >>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#160773): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/160773 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/88551948/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
