From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57983)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1W1OHQ-00089o-Of
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:40:57 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1W1OHI-00027S-Bp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:40:48 -0500
Received: from mail-ee0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c00::22d]:56851)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1W1OHH-00027I-Vp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:40:40 -0500
Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id d49so1560697eek.18
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 14:40:39 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <52CF2561.7050105@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:40:33 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1389304508-10100-1-git-send-email-steven@uplinklabs.net>
In-Reply-To: <1389304508-10100-1-git-send-email-steven@uplinklabs.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] configure: add option to disable
 -fstack-protector flags
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>
Cc: Steven Noonan <snoonan@amazon.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>

Il 09/01/2014 22:55, Steven Noonan ha scritto:
> From: Steven Noonan <snoonan@amazon.com>
> 
> The -fstack-protector flag family is useful for ensuring safety and for
> debugging, but has a performance impact. Here's a boot time comparison between
> a QEMU build of qemu-system-arm with and without the -fstack-protector-all
> flag:
> 
>     # WITHOUT -fstack-protector-all
>     [root@localhost ~]# systemd-analyze
>     Startup finished in 1.744s (kernel) + 11.345s (initrd) + 47.164s (userspace) = 1min 255ms
> 
>     # WITH -fstack-protector-all
>     [root@localhost ~]# systemd-analyze
>     Startup finished in 1.843s (kernel) + 12.262s (initrd) + 1min 3.480s (userspace) = 1min 17.587s

Can you try -fstack-protector-strong?

Probably the right thing to do is to pick in order
-fstack-protector-strong, -fstack-protector, and nothing.

Paolo