[Bug middle-end/95249] Stack protector runtime has to waste one byte on null terminator

2020-05-20 Thread bugdal at aerifal dot cx
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95249 --- Comment #2 from Rich Felker --- Indeed, using an extra zero pad byte could bump the stack frame size by 4 or 8 or 16 bytes, or could leave it unchanged, depending on alignment prior to adding the byte and the alignment requirements of the

[Bug middle-end/95249] Stack protector runtime has to waste one byte on null terminator

2020-05-20 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95249 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski --- I doubt you could skip one byte as the protector location has to be aligned. So the trade off is adding at least 4 or 8 bytes (depending on which ABI is used) or 8bits less of the randomness.