From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: "Song, BinX" <binx.song@intel.com>,
"edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Cc: "Gao, Liming" <liming.gao@intel.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MdeModulePkg: Fix GCC48/GCC49 build error
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 18:16:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1eca3726-e92f-7fbb-d61f-f8026c0b4762@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <559D2DF22BC9A3468B4FA1AA547F0EF102551554@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
adding Ard
On 04/01/17 10:38, Song, BinX wrote:
> - Fix GCC48/GCC49 build error
>
> Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
> Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
> ---
> .../Library/BrotliCustomDecompressLib/BrotliCustomDecompressLib.inf | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Library/BrotliCustomDecompressLib/BrotliCustomDecompressLib.inf b/MdeModulePkg/Library/BrotliCustomDecompressLib/BrotliCustomDecompressLib.inf
> index 578f97f..4c9aff5 100644
> --- a/MdeModulePkg/Library/BrotliCustomDecompressLib/BrotliCustomDecompressLib.inf
> +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Library/BrotliCustomDecompressLib/BrotliCustomDecompressLib.inf
> @@ -54,3 +54,6 @@
> DebugLib
> BaseMemoryLib
> ExtractGuidedSectionLib
> +
> +[BuildOptions]
> + GCC:*_*_*_CC_FLAGS = -fno-builtin
>
In "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template", we currently have:
DEFINE GCC_ARM_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC_ALL_CC_FLAGS) [...] -fno-builtin [...]
DEFINE GCC_AARCH64_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC_ALL_CC_FLAGS) [...] -fno-builtin [...]
DEFINE GCC5_IA32_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS) -fno-builtin
DEFINE GCC5_X64_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_X64_CC_FLAGS) -fno-builtin
Now, GCC5_IA32_CC_FLAGS goes back to GCC44_ALL_CC_FLAGS, via:
- GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC48_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC47_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC46_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC45_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC44_IA32_CC_FLAGS
- GCC44_ALL_CC_FLAGS
(similarly for GCC5_X64_CC_FLAGS.)
So, instead of this patch for BrotliCustomDecompressLib, how about:
- moving "-fno-builtin" from
GCC_ARM_CC_FLAGS and
GCC_AARCH64_CC_FLAGS
to
GCC_ALL_CC_FLAGS, and
- moving "-fno-builtin" from
GCC5_IA32_CC_FLAGS and
GCC5_X64_CC_FLAGS
to
GCC44_ALL_CC_FLAGS?
Do we have any reason for permitting builtins at all?
Thanks,
Laszlo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-03 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-01 8:38 [PATCH] MdeModulePkg: Fix GCC48/GCC49 build error Song, BinX
2017-04-03 16:16 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2017-04-03 16:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2017-04-03 16:34 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-04-05 4:52 ` Gao, Liming
2017-04-05 8:03 ` Laszlo Ersek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1eca3726-e92f-7fbb-d61f-f8026c0b4762@redhat.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox