From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com (mail-wm1-f66.google.com [209.85.128.66]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.11308.1590852182059649684 for ; Sat, 30 May 2020 08:23:02 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=VY8KIJLa; spf=pass (domain: nuviainc.com, ip: 209.85.128.66, mailfrom: leif@nuviainc.com) Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id u26so8835125wmn.1 for ; Sat, 30 May 2020 08:23:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nuviainc-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=+HADhCMiz5uoxNtBQR2AuCHRmwE+Agc0pdGQQjuAMUk=; b=VY8KIJLa4JRGTZqqjEaLDFtZw8KqHPtAK1ktPC7zdg+8Rc7QzogwUU2LJrgoE6XFx6 eUNMJfKT7ZHDZwe197Rgn+DYkEgglBIQNSY6Ox1H2I5QFcM/YbvHy+CNtXs+P2MrHNqE 9BTt+gPJCN9NvyFgdlrYnTskbUBv3krpqLvMAhhqY2vPH+gOUyLIe8LVEtg2GrKHU7FN mF84U6Q4HgxEEopB75g53lgyhBf2h3k5myxRyvhHlf0B0sP9W6XMFs8oZQ/9rT60bbS7 7B/oix1FbxqsxVAbO3/yrD4B9c+ncAMDZ5Nntcnzxwnlqr/9Twdon6nHgxc2vkptFcq4 TTCg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+HADhCMiz5uoxNtBQR2AuCHRmwE+Agc0pdGQQjuAMUk=; b=JU/D67zaf5K4/Zr0aefzq+NQSuN0H9pl04hFcu4863xgk/2dygw9hyFcnpzU0Hwx5t eV5Sfov5dH/yvwcvdttmcu4BUb6mtjF4Sshlh8FXzHaJHAYmG0g7mmPtvoxwrN3gAMl7 fyCaYWWmG7Bk7XCS3gsMAFYa53eD0+Io5ZxZtORx02Ix7NC0fBQngW1Jt7gMuWfLtaS+ XEInNgaoOn+joJZQHxsJqO7EkFjTemrcwc3i0nioAo3vRZbSRTeY7lXj5jAStQ10Y3cn QtmoZRznxZ0CrE7Wuil+8eg58N9D1O4yPreLtlQWweKSi+ykEO0zlb3FLpxDYssbuc2C kgcg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532gss8+z8hLG7uBK/ArNnEph212DnM1D8qGYDWPtEnSXXW47l9l Sl76gdOXrmmIxT18RJ67dUOc6w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy62N17JFn4WV4BAR1DpYk+UufMpd96A51Dt516RmCF9A/zciKHx/O3rOLP8/Hxq9wOrFlnSg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:11cc:: with SMTP id b12mr13819344wmi.153.1590852180652; Sat, 30 May 2020 08:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from vanye ([2001:470:1f09:12f0:b26e:bfff:fea9:f1b8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a124sm4340264wmh.4.2020.05.30.08.22.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 30 May 2020 08:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 30 May 2020 16:22:57 +0100 From: "Leif Lindholm" To: "Gao, Liming" Cc: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "ard.biesheuvel@arm.com" , "lersek@redhat.com" , "philmd@redhat.com" , "mliska@suse.cz" , "Kinney, Michael D" , "afish@apple.com" Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ Message-ID: <20200530152257.GA1709@vanye> References: <5587f0f0-9f30-62ce-9d07-5eed4ac6daa7@arm.com> <20200526143725.GM1923@vanye> <0f2f90b9-e2fe-5658-e507-299a387e0ce5@redhat.com> <20200528100515.GC1923@vanye> <6d6e3bb8-647c-42c4-5143-f64f5e6ba81b@redhat.com> <51509986-4950-30b9-73af-874bb991e355@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Liming, Apologies if I have caused confusion (since we have been discussing the same bug on both patches). This patch is *not* required for the stable tag. It will be useful to include *after* the stable tag. The intrinsics patch on its own resolves the problem (by providing resolutions for the generated function calls), whereas *this* patch tells GCC 10.2 or later (not yet released) not to generate those calls in the first place. Best Regards, Leif On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 15:10:07 +0000, Gao, Liming wrote: > Ard: > Lefi requests to catch this change into 202005 stable tag. I also > highlight this request in hard feature freeze notice mail > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60421. > > If no objection before the middle of next week (2020-06-03), this > patch can be merged with the updated comments. > > Thanks > Liming > > -----Original Message----- > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Ard Biesheuvel > > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 12:51 AM > > To: Gao, Liming ; devel@edk2.groups.io; lersek@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm > > Cc: philmd@redhat.com; mliska@suse.cz; Kinney, Michael D ; afish@apple.com > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > > > On 5/29/20 4:29 PM, Gao, Liming wrote: > > > Ard: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Ard Biesheuvel > > >> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 1:47 PM > > >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming ; lersek@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm > > >> Cc: philmd@redhat.com; mliska@suse.cz > > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > >> > > >> On 5/29/20 5:18 AM, Liming Gao via groups.io wrote: > > >>> Leif: > > >>> I get the point that the linux distribution default GCC version may be 10 or above. Without this fix, those developers can’t pass > > >> build edk2-stable202005. So, you think this is a critical issue to catch stable tag 202005. > > >>> > > >>> Ard: > > >>> For this patch, I have two minor comments. > > >>> 1) I suggest to remove Link: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2723 from comments, because this information has > > >> been in the commit message. > > >> > > >> I think it would be helpful to keep it but I won't insist. > > >> > > > > > > I agree this is useful. But, we record it in the commit message. I prefer to remove this link from source code. > > > With this change, Reviewed-by: Liming Gao > > > > > > > > > Works for me. > > > > I will send a v2 after the stable tag is released. > > > > > > >>> 2) Can we think __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined? Do we need to check its value after check whether it is defined or not? > > >>> > > >> > > >> Yes __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Laszlo Ersek > > >>> Sent: 2020年5月29日 4:03 > > >>> To: Leif Lindholm > > >>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel ; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming ; philmd@redhat.com; > > >> mliska@suse.cz > > >>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > >>> > > >>> On 05/28/20 12:05, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > >>>> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:12:23 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > >>>>>>>> Oh and I think both this patch and the assembly language > > >>>>>>>> implementation for the atomics should be delayed after the stable > > >>>>>>>> tag. gcc-10 is a new toolchain; so even if we don't introduce a > > >>>>>>>> new toolchain tag such as > > >>>>>>>> GCC10 for it, whatever we do in order to make it work, that's > > >>>>>>>> feature enablement in my book. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Works for me. By the time the next stable tag comes around, early > > >>>>>>> adopters that are now on GCC 10.1 will likely have moved to 10.2 by > > >>>>>>> that time, and so we may not need the assembly patch at all. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I'm not ecstatic that we'll be releasing the first stable tag known > > >>>>>> to break with current toolchains. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If this breakage affects "current toolchains", then why was > > >>>>> only reported > > >>>>> on 2020-May-19, four days into the soft feature freeze? > > >>>> > > >>>> I agree the timing is crap. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> This isn't just affecting random crazies pulling latest toolchains > > >>>>>> down, but people using their distro defaults (native or cross). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ... "people using their distro defaults" to *not* build upstream edk2 > > >>>>> until 2020-May-19, apparently. > > >>>> > > >>>> Or distro defaults changing in between. I mean, we could say "Arch is > > >>>> the same as any other distro's unstable", but I wouldn't want to go > > >>>> down that route - I know people who use it for developing also for > > >>>> qemu and linux. > > >>>> > > >>>> Argh, I also just realised the error report I saw two days after Ard's > > >>>> intrinsics patch hit the list was not a public report. Yes, if this > > >>>> had affected only in-development/unstable distributions, I agree this > > >>>> isn't something we should try to deal with upstream. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> I don't recall if 10.1 ended up being default in F32, but it was > > >>>>>> definitely included. In Arch, it does appear default. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Debian/Ubuntu are unaffected in their stable releases. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I agree it's a transitional issue, but I would really prefer to have > > >>>>>> the intrinsics included in the release. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> OK, let's delay the release then, by a few days. I agree the present > > >>>>> patch may qualify as a bugfix, but the other patch with the assembly > > >>>>> language intrinsics doesn't. If it's really that important to have in > > >>>>> the upcoming stable tag, then it's worth delaying the tag for. I'm > > >>>>> fine delaying the release for it; it wouldn't be without precedent. > > >>>> > > >>>> I would argue it *is* a bugfix, since it only has an effect on builds > > >>>> that would otherwise fail. > > >>> > > >>> OK. That's a good argument. From my POV, feel free to merge (both patches). > > >>> > > >>> Thanks > > >>> Laszlo > > >>> > > >>>> But I also do think it is important enough to delay the release if we > > >>>> feel that is necessary. > > >>>> > > >>>> / > > >>>> Leif > > >>>> > > >>>>> Also, I think Ard's assembly language patch needs a Tested-by from > > >>>>> Gary at the least (reporter of TianoCore#2723). Please reach out to > > >>>>> him in that thread. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ... More precisely, please *ping* Gary for a Tested-by in that > > >>>>> thread, because Ard CC'd him from the start, and even credited Gary > > >>>>> in the commit message. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>> Laszlo > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > >