From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 446E5C2D0E2 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:38:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029C8238E3 for ; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 14:38:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="hiJKP0bA" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728314AbgIXOhn (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:37:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59224 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727859AbgIXOhm (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Sep 2020 10:37:42 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1043.google.com (mail-pj1-x1043.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1043]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5411C0613CE; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:37:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1043.google.com with SMTP id kk9so1710652pjb.2; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:37:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=R4i9zfdadrrnX71hdqQs+VUvQUPUWHpKuSmEnQbyjS8=; b=hiJKP0bAeEVszBpBvejJbuJiDShopwcUlAdy/0Ct7Z/ZeRpHKTd3xKoQqJISulqHLC o3QhS8X5OWXtiH0N4CUu8RearRtfQMFCFNSt2maa+MmdaSSVkPHW4qtawkJg36jidSOm /irTHDtRvnkB1jD5whetMY8pNqt42PyFrDWjNCCXoi7BBoqxQZqEVPPFPP0BWKsqnueO pDwMmfdKdL1c9lz+8//JjTqORLevu7lTK1V5bdnnXWHmako/f7q6nTkkPazPrzjIl0Ly lUnA6B4JoqBChEMr9qs6UTqeAKe0S3PP6TnQGlVkEb/7Iywp6n7cRr2GKGvJjHHWZ6Xt o14w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=R4i9zfdadrrnX71hdqQs+VUvQUPUWHpKuSmEnQbyjS8=; b=BgQCNGx9h4NBkxvjhqC8FjWNfR1QVJg3RVVzNmaoludvp7A4oSWfkl54Du7emfmnz+ iZ+QCJv6GujXBflfpnhCdJGTFZowHaK8j2mZkPOzBsOK5wlMSrgr1HvEVAKLX1Fg52ER n1iyD8ssrccTMZu9X++UWKsgxKN20bfUpRNp6kqAueUXpyU4Ug1afQxPg5AZ5Uvn2AWs G46R2PfeWuwYdeTMBp+X5KsZ/YKRS/cWaB/MVC8S/6S0UzvYUHycR6gQdYNr1FXHXfYq m+zXNVx8tdq4Po8S0bTVzxEDWuVrfunw1ZZxe6GMZHcFslps3YdblsjQlZ+f1SQB3UlX RQvw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533yQmfAumVLl9txIHm3Nl033Bis+Kyx+MZEAOhzitkRpoCNBaVe fPpeOgr+bfjHI83eL4nqLQZVzCmDCL58DW3ublQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxI8taE+t29cLPBxt1C7MtUjX7XEzXJn+KUQrK2FVrn5H2GVR8hAH3xPJgoEQKHMvW91tmC6yI55nuIDVbPdds= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3252:: with SMTP id jy18mr4112252pjb.1.1600958262336; Thu, 24 Sep 2020 07:37:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20bbc8ed4b9f2c83d0f67f37955eb2d789268525.1600951211.git.yifeifz2@illinois.edu> <7042ba3307b34ce3b95e5fede823514e@AcuMS.aculab.com> <665ea57e360a421c958fffa08da77920@AcuMS.aculab.com> In-Reply-To: <665ea57e360a421c958fffa08da77920@AcuMS.aculab.com> From: YiFei Zhu Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 09:37:30 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 seccomp 2/6] asm/syscall.h: Add syscall_arches[] array To: David Laight Cc: "containers@lists.linux-foundation.org" , YiFei Zhu , "bpf@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Aleksa Sarai , Andrea Arcangeli , Andy Lutomirski , Dimitrios Skarlatos , Giuseppe Scrivano , Hubertus Franke , Jack Chen , Jann Horn , Josep Torrellas , Kees Cook , Tianyin Xu , Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum , Tycho Andersen , Valentin Rothberg , Will Drewry Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 9:20 AM David Laight 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