llvm dev - Dec 2019 - Discuss about the LLVM SW mitigation to Jump Conditional Code Erratum

I will reply those comments tomorrow.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191204/f1111299/attachment.html>

Annita, do you have measurements with inserting NOPs instead of redundant
segment prefixes. The code review was asking for performance data to show
that prefixes are better than NOPs.

~Craig


On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 5:40 AM Zhang, Annita via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I will reply those comments tomorrow.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20191204/2f219789/attachment.html>

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 8:41 AM Craig Topper via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Annita, do you have measurements with inserting NOPs instead of redundant
segment prefixes. The code review was asking for performance data to show that
prefixes are better than NOPs.
>
> ~Craig
Also -ffunction-sections. With more sections, it may be easier to
exhibit non-convergence problems. The compile time may not be slowed
much because functions will be smaller. The code size may increase if
more sections need over-alignment.