Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1600951211.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu> <20bbc8ed4b9f2c83d0f67f37955eb2d789268525.1600951211.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu>
 <7042ba3307b34ce3b95e5fede823514e@AcuMS.aculab.com> <CABqSeASWf_CArdOzASLeRBPZQ-S_vtinhZLteYng4iAof4py+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <665ea57e360a421c958fffa08da77920@AcuMS.aculab.com>
In-Reply-To: <665ea57e360a421c958fffa08da77920@AcuMS.aculab.com>
From:   YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:37:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CABqSeARmtCk+vUbUfQ39z+mCXiHm2Gd=OopLHXvPTnvwcHfwOw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 seccomp 2/6] asm/syscall.h: Add syscall_arches[] array
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Cc:     "containers@lists.linux-foundation.org" 
        <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        YiFei Zhu <yifeifz2@illinois.edu>,
        "bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Dimitrios Skarlatos <dskarlat@cs.cmu.edu>,
        Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@redhat.com>,
        Hubertus Franke <frankeh@us.ibm.com>,
        Jack Chen <jianyan2@illinois.edu>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Josep Torrellas <torrella@illinois.edu>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Tianyin Xu <tyxu@illinois.edu>,
        Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum <tobin@ibm.com>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.pizza>,
        Valentin Rothberg <vrothber@redhat.com>,
        Will Drewry <wad@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:20 AM David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.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