mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Wood <aaron.w...@verizon.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 52696: Harden stout
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2016 15:35:38 GMT


> On Nov. 2, 2016, 9:33 a.m., Benjamin Bannier wrote:
> > I would really like to see actual timings of e.g., an optimized build before and
after introducing these new flags, e.g., the runtime of `stout-tests`.

Just attached a bunch of benchmarking info that I had saved from when I posted it in the cxx
Slack channel.


- 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
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message