On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 9:55 AM, H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/27/2013 09:54 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >>> >>> Looks to be 2% for defconfig. That's way better. Shall I send a v3? >> >> Well, it's better than 9%, but still almost an order of magnitude >> higher than the cost is today, and a lot of distros have >> CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR=y. >> >> So it would be nice to measure how much the instruction count goes up >> in some realistic system-bound test. How much does something like >> kernel/built-in.o increase, as per 'size' output?
text data bss dec hex filename 929611 90851 594496 1614958 18a46e built-in.o-gcc-4.9 954648 90851 594496 1639995 19063b built-in.o-gcc-4.9+strong Looks like 3% for defconfg + CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR > > Do we need CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG? I'm hoping to avoid this since nearly anyone using CC_STACKPROTECTOR would want strong added, but as a fallback, I'm happy to implement it as a separate config item. -Kees -- Kees Cook Chrome OS Security -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
