linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 seccomp 2/6] asm/syscall.h: Add syscall

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABqSeARmtCk+vUbUfQ39z+mCXiHm2Gd=OopLHXvPTnvwcHfwOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:37:30 -0500
From:   YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@...il.com>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     "containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        YiFei Zhu <yifeifz2@...inois.edu>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Dimitrios Skarlatos <dskarlat@...cmu.edu>,
        Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@...hat.com>,
        Hubertus Franke <frankeh@...ibm.com>,
        Jack Chen <jianyan2@...inois.edu>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Josep Torrellas <torrella@...inois.edu>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Tianyin Xu <tyxu@...inois.edu>,
        Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@....com>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.pizza>,
        Valentin Rothberg <vrothber@...hat.com>,
        Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 seccomp 2/6] asm/syscall.h: Add syscall_arches[] array

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:20 AM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
> > Granted, I have CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE rather than
> > CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE, but this patch itself is trying to sacrifice
> > some of the memory for speed.
>
> Don't both CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_PERFORMANCE (-??) and CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE (-s)
> generate terrible code?

You have to choose one for "Compiler optimization level" in "General Setup", no?
The former is -O2 and the latter is -Os.

> Try with a slghtly older gcc.
> I think that entire optimisation (discarding const arrays)
> is very recent.

Will try, will take a while to get an old GCC to run, however :/

YiFei Zhu