> On Nov. 2, 2016, 9:33 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote: > > 3rdparty/stout/Makefile.am, line 27 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/diff/4/?file=1551003#file1551003line27> > > > > 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/52696/#review154526 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 2, 2016, 3:35 p.m., Aaron Wood wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 2, 2016, 3:35 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 > stout. Additionally, check and catch more warnings/errors. > > > Diffs > ----- > > 3rdparty/stout/Makefile.am 4e10ae2 > 3rdparty/stout/configure.ac cbb0fdb > 3rdparty/stout/m4/ax_check_compile_flag.m4 PRE-CREATION > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/52696/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. > > > File Attachments > ---------------- > > --enable-optimized with hardening applied > > https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/18a2f590-75ad-49c5-a697-56b746f28cae__hardened-optimized.txt > Hardening applied but no --enable-optimized > > https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/a6e07766-80cc-4bd7-856d-8952cac12562__hardened-unoptimized.txt > --enable-optimized with no hardening applied > > https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/046b37a9-5aff-4543-b3bb-5ac60daaf498__optimized.txt > No hardening applied and no --enable-optimized > > https://reviews.apache.org/media/uploaded/files/2016/11/02/3baa96cf-be05-4ac0-ad4c-ef571386e8f4__unoptimized.txt > > > Thanks, > > Aaron Wood > >
