> On Nov. 2, 2016, 9:33 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > src/Makefile.am, line 114 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/diff/7/?file=1550864#file1550864line114> > > > > I am not a big fan of unconditionally omitting frame pointers as this > > gives the optimizer one less register to work with. Unfortunately one > > cannot easily tell the actual impact of this from the info here. Is this > > strictly needed here or just nice to have?
Going to drop this since we've all agreed on Slack to have the frame pointer modification done in a separate patch. - Aaron ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/#review154524 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 1, 2016, 7:37 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 1, 2016, 7:37 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, James Peach, Michael Park, and Neil Conway. > > > Bugs: MESOS-6229 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-6229 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > Use a default set of flags to provide additional security and hardening to > Mesos. Additionally, check and catch more warnings/errors. > > > Diffs > ----- > > configure.ac c8d48be > m4/ax_check_compile_flag.m4 PRE-CREATION > src/Makefile.am c2f9e44 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52645/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Compared the benchmarks with and without the flags being used. Also did a > comparsion with the flags being used with and without optimizations and > without the flags being used with and without optimizations. Overall the > performance hit was very small with a 3-8% overhead (optimizations brings > this down slightly). Most benchmarks were about 5% (or less) slower. > > > Thanks, > > Aaron Wood > >
