From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <lersek@redhat.com>
Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom;
 client-ip=209.132.183.28; helo=mx1.redhat.com; envelope-from=lersek@redhat.com;
 receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org 
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4982D211B113C
 for <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>; Mon,  7 Jan 2019 10:08:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
 [10.5.11.22])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C342286679;
 Mon,  7 Jan 2019 18:08:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-126-62.rdu2.redhat.com
 [10.10.126.62])
 by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26BC7105705A;
 Mon,  7 Jan 2019 18:08:25 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Gao, Liming" <liming.gao@intel.com>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= <philmd@redhat.com>,
 edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Cc: "Ni, Ray" <ray.ni@intel.com>, "Ye, Ting" <ting.ye@intel.com>,
 "Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>,
 "Justen, Jordan L" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>,
 Anthony Perard <anthony.perard@citrix.com>, "Qian, Yi" <yi.qian@intel.com>
References: <20190103024816.9236-1-lersek@redhat.com>
 <a79db6c6-54c3-7a89-9486-abd36c2612b8@redhat.com>
 <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E3AD113@SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com>
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <020b38a7-cb17-aa75-1054-a91e7adee32a@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2019 19:08:25 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E3AD113@SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16
 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:08:34 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] remove the GCC44 through GCC47 toolchains
X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EDK II Development  <edk2-devel.lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/options/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
List-Help: <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:08:35 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 01/07/19 13:15, Gao, Liming wrote:
> Laszlo:
>   This patch set is good to me. Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>

Many thanks to everyone for the quick reviews!

>   Besides this patch set, I suggest to let GCC48/GCC49/GCC5 refer to the common GCC_ flags. After I remove ELFGCC/UNIXGCC/CYGGCC tool chain, I will update GCC_ flags to be same to current GCC48_ flags, then remove GCC48_ flag definition.

Sounds good to me, thanks. IIRC I actually looked into calling that
stuff just GCC_, but I seem to remember that the subject macros were
already defined for other purposes. Once you eliminate
ELFGCC/UNIXGCC/CYGGCC, hopefully all those macros can be collapsed.

For this series, I plan to go through the feedback tags in detail,
shortly, and push the series if everything is sufficiently approved.

Thanks!
Laszlo