From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.8.1580841275271055777 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 10:34:35 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=dsWzz9y0; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 207.211.31.120, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1580841274; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=n6kwWxW8JVjIJV9mPoPCQqp7bVQuce/ewVnkvushP4s=; b=dsWzz9y07jytat9gZPEtFy98GGbXRYcI51T2P3WBLEXqIIJZvy67K81Xq7CJ3k+i6m+z5D RSAFlX9lbIAtqms8YK31bVzOh5Nvm2A/qN23tvBAoamyQssROvvIoKLmsBngaF8CAmQNdy 2iYEQFx8q3BObs2PlKRl1PkJUbSDPrI= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-169-Nq9J6cb0Oo-ysiEku8O0Tg-1; Tue, 04 Feb 2020 13:34:28 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6171801E6C; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:34:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-30.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.30]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB43986C4A; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:34:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch] BaseTools tools_def.template: Add back -fno-pie option in GCC49 tool chain To: "Gao, Liming" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" Cc: "Feng, Bob C" , Ard Biesheuvel References: <20200204045456.241-1-liming.gao@intel.com> <9cfe929c-0448-d7d2-2ce1-cd491ce16083@redhat.com> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: <393aea9d-990c-b203-9480-bc4125a9f6bd@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 19:34:24 +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: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-MC-Unique: Nq9J6cb0Oo-ysiEku8O0Tg-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/04/20 13:52, Gao, Liming wrote: > Laszlo: > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Laszlo Ersek >> Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2020 8:02 PM >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >> Cc: Feng, Bob C ; Ard Biesheuvel >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [Patch] BaseTools tools_def.template: Add back -fno-pie option in GCC49 tool chain >> >> (+Ard) >> >> On 02/04/20 05:54, Liming Gao wrote: >>> BZ: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2502 >>> This option is required to make GCC49 tool chain work with the high >>> version GCC compiler. >>> >>> Cc: Bob Feng >>> Signed-off-by: Liming Gao >>> --- >>> BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template b/BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template >>> index feee2bbf16..d02424ae44 100755 >>> --- a/BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template >>> +++ b/BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template >>> @@ -1974,7 +1974,7 @@ DEFINE GCC48_ARM_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC_ARM_ASLDLINK_FLAGS) -Wl,--oformat >>> DEFINE GCC48_AARCH64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC_AARCH64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC48_ASLCC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC_ASLCC_FLAGS) >>> >>> -DEFINE GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_IA32_CC_FLAGS) >>> +DEFINE GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_IA32_CC_FLAGS) -fno-pic -fno-pie >>> DEFINE GCC49_X64_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_X64_CC_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC49_IA32_X64_DLINK_COMMON = -nostdlib -Wl,-n,-q,--gc-sections -z common-page-size=0x40 >>> DEFINE GCC49_IA32_X64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_IA32_X64_DLINK_COMMON) -Wl,--defsym=PECOFF_HEADER_SIZE=0 >> DEF(GCC_DLINK2_FLAGS_COMMON) -Wl,--entry,ReferenceAcpiTable -u ReferenceAcpiTable >>> @@ -1997,7 +1997,7 @@ DEFINE GCC49_ARM_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_ARM_ASLDLINK_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC49_AARCH64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_AARCH64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC49_ASLCC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC48_ASLCC_FLAGS) >>> >>> -DEFINE GCC5_IA32_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS) -fno-pic -fno-pie >>> +DEFINE GCC5_IA32_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_IA32_CC_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC5_X64_CC_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_X64_CC_FLAGS) >>> DEFINE GCC5_IA32_X64_DLINK_COMMON = DEF(GCC49_IA32_X64_DLINK_COMMON) >>> DEFINE GCC5_IA32_X64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS = DEF(GCC49_IA32_X64_ASLDLINK_FLAGS) >>> >> >> - What has changed relative to commit 11d0cd23dd1b ("BaseTools/tools_def >> IA32: drop -no-pie linker option for GCC49", 2018-06-18)? >> >> - Also, if we are reverting one half of 11d0cd23dd1b (the compiler >> flags), shouldn't we then revert the other half too (the linker flags)? > > Yes. Half change is revert. CC_FLAGS is added back. DLINK flag is not, > because GCC4.9 doesn't know the link option -no-pie. But, GCC 4.9 accepts the CC option -fno-pie. > I verify this change. CC flags -fno-pie can resolve the build failure with GCC7.4. I also see -fno-pie option > Is in GCC ARM and AARCH64 arch. So, I think this change is enough. > >> >> - The commit message says, "work with the high version GCC compiler". >> What does that mean? If it is 4.9.x, with x>2, then I agree the patch is >> justified (because commit 11d0cd23dd1b was apparently made for 4.9.2). >> But if the phrase stands for gcc8 or so (just an example), then I don't >> think the patch is a good idea; users of gcc8 can just specify the GCC5 >> toolchain. >> >> Ah, indeed, I need only look at TianoCore#2502: >> >> "GCC49 tool chain meets with the build failure when GCC7.4 compiler". >> >> So I think this approach is wrong. Unless there is a new gcc-4.9.x >> release, i.e., after gcc-4.9.2, I think we still need commit >> 11d0cd23dd1b in place. And, please use GCC5 for gcc-7.4 -- is there a >> problem with that? > > By design, GCC49 can work with the high version GCC compiler like GCC5. > GCC49 is the tool chain without LTO enable. GCC5 is the tool chain with LTO. > So, they are for two different GCC setting. They should both support > high version GCC compiler. GCC49 supported GCC compiler version is from GCC 4.9. > GCC5 supported GCC compiler version is from GCC 5.0. I know GCC49 or GCC5 tool chain > name brings a little confuse. I will add more detail info in tools_def.txt for them. Ah right, thanks for reminding me of this! OK, I no longer object to this patch. Thanks! Laszlo