From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
esandeen@redhat.com, cebbert@redhat.com,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: Unnecessary overhead with stack protector.
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:07:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091015190720.GA19467@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091015183540.GA8098@redhat.com>
(Cc:-ed Arjan too.)
* Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> 113c5413cf9051cc50b88befdc42e3402bb92115 introduced a change that made
> CC_STACKPROTECTOR_ALL not-selectable if someone enables
> CC_STACKPROTECTOR.
>
> We've noticed in Fedora that this has introduced noticable overhead on
> some functions, including those which don't even have any on-stack
> variables.
>
> According to the gcc manpage, -fstack-protector will protect functions
> with as little as 8 bytes of stack usage. So we're introducing a huge
> amount of overhead, to close a small amount of vulnerability (the >0
> && <8 case).
>
> The overhead as it stands right now means this whole option is
> unusable for a distro kernel without reverting the above commit.
Exactly what workload showed overhead, and how much?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-15 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-15 18:35 Unnecessary overhead with stack protector Dave Jones
2009-10-15 19:07 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-10-21 15:50 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-10-21 18:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-21 18:59 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-10-21 19:09 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-10-21 19:24 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-10-21 21:08 ` Chuck Ebbert
2009-10-21 19:16 ` XFS stack overhead Ingo Molnar
2009-10-21 19:21 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-10-21 20:22 ` Chuck Ebbert
2009-10-22 1:26 ` Unnecessary overhead with stack protector Andrew Morton
2009-10-26 16:30 ` Chuck Ebbert
2009-10-26 16:37 ` Andrew Morton
2009-10-26 16:56 ` Chuck Ebbert
2009-10-26 20:03 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091015190720.GA19467@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=esandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox