From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9622D1A1F7C for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:44:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Sep 2016 19:44:57 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,380,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="1060791638" Received: from fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.205]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Sep 2016 19:44:58 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx158.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.75) by fmsmsx107.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:44:56 -0700 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.69) by fmsmsx158.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 19:44:56 -0700 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.15]) by SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.234]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:44:54 +0800 From: "Gao, Liming" To: Laszlo Ersek , Bruce Cran , "edk2-devel@ml01.01.org" CC: Ard Biesheuvel , "Zhu, Yonghong" Thread-Topic: [edk2] NOOPT OVMF build (or otherwise with optimizations disabled) Thread-Index: AQHSFH3IjPsTarEzIEOpqo/PF66daKCEVw+AgACZKTCAAOlTAIAAhlTA Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 02:44:53 +0000 Message-ID: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14B47BF36@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <37fea717-e59b-d20b-8223-54ed6caa215d@cran.org.uk> <9d78e357-1490-3760-c165-85c5242bf7de@redhat.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14B47BA46@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NOOPT OVMF build (or otherwise with optimizations disabled) 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: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 02:44:57 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks! Ok for yonghong.=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Laszlo Ersek [mailto:lersek@redhat.com] > Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 10:44 AM > To: Gao, Liming ; Bruce Cran ; > edk2-devel@ml01.01.org > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel ; Zhu, Yonghong > > Subject: Re: [edk2] NOOPT OVMF build (or otherwise with optimizations > disabled) >=20 > On 09/22/16 06:52, Gao, Liming wrote: > > Laszlo: > > Yes. GCC tool chain has no NOOPT setting in tools_def.txt. Could you > > help submit one bug in Bugzilla? >=20 > I filed . >=20 > Since all (open?) BaseTools BZs seem to be assigned to Yonghong at the > moment, I followed suit here. If that's not okay, please modify the > Assignee field accordingly. >=20 > Thanks! > Laszlo >=20 > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of > >> Laszlo Ersek > >> Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 11:41 AM > >> To: Bruce Cran ; edk2-devel@ml01.01.org > >> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel > >> Subject: Re: [edk2] NOOPT OVMF build (or otherwise with optimizations > >> disabled) > >> > >> On 09/22/16 05:02, Bruce Cran wrote: > >>> Would it be possible to either have a NOOPT build for OVMF added, or > >>> have the DEBUG build disable optimizations? Personally I'd expect > >>> debug builds in general to disable optimizations to allow easy > >>> source-level debugging, but it seems the decision has been made to > keep > >>> optimizations enabled for EDK2 and have a NOOPT configuration for > >>> debugging? > >> > >> Yes, I seem to recall that DEBUG means optimizations enabled, but debu= g > >> code (such as DEBUG(), ASSERT(), DEBUG_CODE(...), > ASSERT_EFI_ERROR()) > >> included. Indeed NOOPT seems to be what edk2 assigns generally to the > >> build you'd like. > >> > >> A NOOPT build target for OVMF (and more generally for GCC toolchains I > >> guess?) should be possible, likely even welcome, I believe. If only > >> someone contributed such BaseTools patches. :) > >> > >> ('git grep -e NOOPT --and -e GCC -- BaseTools' returns no hits.) > >> > >> Thanks > >> Laszlo > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> edk2-devel mailing list > >> edk2-devel@lists.01.org > >> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel