Re: [arch-general] arch-general Digest, Vol 139, Issue 14
On 05/17/2016 07:00 AM, arch-general-request@archlinux.org wrote:
In the past there has been various (performance) reasons with gcc5 that hold up stepping further, so the decision was to not backport gcc6 patches and wait for gcc6 so arrive. Fortunately gcc6 arrived so the topic landed again on the tables for discussion. The current state is that we wanted to have some benchmarking with current (non-PIE) and PIE enabled binaries to compare them and make sure it eliminated all previous concerns.
If you want to to really help pushing this topic in an official way then the most useful and best step you could do is helping out to do those benchmarks.
cheers, Levente ohh, ok. that makes sense. I would be glad to benchmark as many packages as needed, assuming someone doesn't mind telling me how it needs to be done.
thanks, ITwrx
On May 17, 2016, at 12:11 PM, Information Technology Works <info@itwrx.org> wrote:
ohh, ok. that makes sense. I would be glad to benchmark as many packages as needed, assuming someone doesn't mind telling me how it needs to be done.
I started some preliminary work with Levente, and first indications are that we should see very little in terms of performance impact. I have begun work on an automated testing framework, which will be located here: https://github.com/pid1/test-sec-flags Ideally, we will automatically use various combinations of flags, and log the benchmarks of each for later comparison. Patches welcome. Cheers, pid1
participants (2)
-
Information Technology Works
-
Jonathan Roemer