On 27.01.23 19:46, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

What am I missing?

Note that I've seen and recently re-read the discussion that leads to
https://lore.kernel.org/git/f680b274-fa85-6624-096a-7753a2671c15@grsecurity.net/ (local)

I suspect that this auto-probe is related to solving "the user
thinks JIT is in use but because of failing JIT the user's pattern
is getting horrible performance" somehow.  But I do not think a hard
failure is a good approach to help users in such a situation.

I guess what I am saying is that the previous one that has been
queued on 'seen' may be better.  It should cover your original
"SELinux and other mechanisms can render JIT unusable because they
do not allow dynamic generation of code" use case.

It clearly does cover my use case but it has a bad impact on the runtime
of pathological patterns. But if you think that's not an issue, I'll
update the changelog of v1 accordingly and resent it.

Thanks,
Mathias