From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37343)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brad@comstyle.com>) id 1W1Orp-00043G-9e
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:18:25 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brad@comstyle.com>) id 1W1Oro-000574-Ef
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:18:25 -0500
Received: from speedy.comstyle.com ([2001:470:1d:8c::2]:14622
	helo=mail.comstyle.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <brad@comstyle.com>) id 1W1Oro-00054D-9k
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:18:24 -0500
Message-ID: <52CF2E2F.4060005@comstyle.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 18:18:07 -0500
From: Brad Smith <brad@comstyle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1389304508-10100-1-git-send-email-steven@uplinklabs.net>
	<52CF2561.7050105@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <52CF2561.7050105@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Steven Noonan <steven@uplinklabs.net>
Cc: Steven Noonan <snoonan@amazon.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>

On 09/01/14 5:40 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 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.

+1


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.