From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6206820A1E for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2018 06:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726452AbeLJGmk (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2018 01:42:40 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f68.google.com ([209.85.128.68]:51631 "EHLO mail-wm1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726100AbeLJGmj (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Dec 2018 01:42:39 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f68.google.com with SMTP id s14so9704337wmh.1 for ; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 22:42:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=5yEcXQEHo7uRrhiT0hOqgxZ+mXDH+QxwTNb6vF1Hyu4=; b=HNDpVIw9S6YxCMT+SkyxgYxfwwi2A1QA7qBomAxBrOUl1/oel+IBPyARyaNPqUxU97 7gYvgU3E3oF7fhqzfXvlFYa1QDXCSy5K5mFqhHOnq/93xq4DJ0SyJMcnWQnHv15ISzle B6KTagZ2CLD1aXdte+XcbF0NJXvWa7nt9F9zUxFexRVNAOBtDz5L6wAbqQ+/mpZD7nji JP00S1tJ2Gj8vx0zXB84L1dx/IcOW13be6+9iGpb87TYQfzRvck4/emXrJs+17R3PuTi NkBG5VvxRHhq5nLob0P9iToBiifQksc1zEw/vF3PQF+3mpFf6uDkse9Hu+NmYf2H9RIq WXjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=5yEcXQEHo7uRrhiT0hOqgxZ+mXDH+QxwTNb6vF1Hyu4=; b=VsXUVKM233sqyf4sdOCiUxWOXH9DDGTcVmqbHcBaNADNVDEjhuilSWpRkNYYRnviUs elTDyDBHX/inxgMFIJc+WGjAjJmqet3Gcfs7iiSBHvWHD/VWwdNG6fTApdF90ZSH4r2z CbSIz4STTuEFxwHubI1cob9eLMUwLiSiiXSgM30pFxUBbQiIpRwPqkLRY1DnUkoM5cTk 3kCb7S159CC2D37KGnZWpEqglIPFimFqFllQhYnp/odiOs3HX4q3D+mVxgCW2wMr5R3S VcubpGCidKox4DGE98zN35PjOYXIDsvv2wKIuEicaFnGjzs2P9ENP3DJePaIk2NZIK65 JDag== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbIngvvWRGxgKUbWH5VM4Ux/MlDXiPQhDyomGQ4L7WmwuIsDEM9 sSDruEOjP6VhtBpt/HJ8huw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Wj4Ta0G94UYRxgIC6VUD+fZs7pDcYCFGdmVLsixmUi5MZv62L5Gy5bLZ0G0Gh0ZyHvDnstIg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:dc02:: with SMTP id t2mr3088987wmg.78.1544424157769; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 22:42:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h16sm31575411wrb.62.2018.12.09.22.42.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 09 Dec 2018 22:42:37 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: "brian m. carlson" Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Carlo Marcelo Arenas =?utf-8?Q?Bel=C3=B3n?= , git@vger.kernel.org, pcre-dev@exim.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] grep: fallback to interpreter if JIT fails with pcre1 References: <20181209230024.43444-1-carenas@gmail.com> <20181209230024.43444-2-carenas@gmail.com> <87r2eqxnru.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20181210004252.GK890086@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 15:42:36 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20181210004252.GK890086@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> (brian m. carlson's message of "Mon, 10 Dec 2018 00:42:52 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "brian m. carlson" writes: > Considering that some Linux users use PaX kernels with standard > distributions and that most BSD kernels can be custom-compiled with a > variety of options enabled or disabled, I think this is something we > should detect dynamically. > ... > My view is that JIT is a nice performance optimization, but it's > optional. I honestly don't think it should even be exposed through the > API: if it works, then things are faster, and if it doesn't, then > they're not. I don't see the value in an option for causing things to be > broken if someone improves the security of the system. I agree to both of these two points. Thanks for a thoughtful discussion, all.