| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 22:52:32 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: PATCH][RFC][resend] CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE should default to N On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:08:24PM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > I believe that the majority of systems we are built on want a -O2 compiled > kernel. Optimizing for size (-Os) is mainly benneficial for embedded > systems and systems with very small CPU caches (correct me if I'm wrong). > So it seems wrong to me that CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE defaults to 'y' and > recommends saying 'Y' if unsure. I believe it should default to 'n' and > recommend that if unsure. People who bennefit from -Os know who they are > and can enable the option if needed/wanted - the majority shouldn't > select this. Right? > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> I've actually seen nothing but problems with -Os. Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists