From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x236.google.com (mail-wm0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A37E1A1DFA for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2016 03:02:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x236.google.com with SMTP id o80so23430123wme.1 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 03:02:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=fHph5lOhgGHwE3D0XzG26Iz4c2cIXSAiOXwqLoDgmco=; b=c7kfx5HhBu3CMJPvLc6OfMk8wK0dY2d+bpO55/z9z8HXVyVC0Zi4orsypXv96gV0UX tZve44C0d/kYypqF1DN+tx3DsPrEi7pjFSaa3OwpelVeXp9CPEXkHCUOpYCbuNk2QrPB xwMDMcrNOKKq37JTimIkGjN4T/NHkz/7qP7YE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=fHph5lOhgGHwE3D0XzG26Iz4c2cIXSAiOXwqLoDgmco=; b=fOLocrmfwzJo6ll1Mj7NjKlppRbJfiehzMIgfKSJOXUWqDhznNXt8wjXdd81KObYgy ewoxQoUKpg5aoQnTjocEBIMwgCQm4XmYPbN1bScdDaY0VZrla3rxZjHbDfFkfbEHUtkM AybJZUXCYuQQxg6KxCd1xvyidNwbNhH+iUr8e2PdP03KnQNfWyQ1m7BKNX6dT8C/okqh N/lwKH2BF7zD3MlKLB9G6PSbFASOftAUz1vIR23DIjtnuYwFcBx8j1FeBzrWlAhn5nkA 9HIduS6mxLpmRCdNibqkOMEos2bPiye0xacPQKzGn+Zsbu4lz1V8x8YSf32jcWWODbh9 rkTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouvPOOFYSg8ExtK2eFO/+eQDQL3UR1d7RGGJ3aldeTcoDpbntd4gM5ToTyIOeZpzIOkR X-Received: by 10.28.153.202 with SMTP id b193mr21675447wme.62.1470736962454; Tue, 09 Aug 2016 03:02:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bivouac.eciton.net (bivouac.eciton.net. [2a00:1098:0:86:1000:23:0:2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p4sm37106493wjq.27.2016.08.09.03.02.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Aug 2016 03:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 11:02:39 +0100 From: Leif Lindholm To: Michael Zimmermann Cc: valerij zaporogeci , edk2-devel , Ard Biesheuvel Message-ID: <20160809100239.GI31760@bivouac.eciton.net> References: <20160809083955.GH31760@bivouac.eciton.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: Toolchain question X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2016 10:02:44 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 11:02:55AM +0200, Michael Zimmermann wrote: > > I use both, and never notice any difference. The primary differences > > are newlib vs glibc, and in some cases, whether symbols are decorated > > with a leading _ > > The actual code generation is more dependent on the default target > > (i.e., -march/-mthumb for ARM) than bare-metal/hosted. > > > I only ever use the native > > compiler under Linux, or one of the linaro "-linux-" flavours if > > cross-compiling. > > I think that works because edk2 excludes all toolchain libs with -nostdlib > and fno-builtin. > I know from other bootloader projects like LK(LittleKernel) which link > against libgcc that compiling with anything but bare-metal toolchains makes > the resulting binary un-bootable. Sure, but those are effectively bugs in the corresponding projects. If they require special options/libraries they should (where possible) manually configure this, or (where not) exit with an error. Regards, Leif