Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

["Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 10/19/23 16:37, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> It was introduced in 2.39 it seems.

Hm, then the macros should still be added please; RHEL9/EPEL9 only offer
binutils 2.38.

> GCC 12 onwards contains this
> binutils version as per my understanding.

No, gcc doesn't "contain" binutils. They are separate packages, and
their versions are not tightly locked together.

> This version was released
> quite long back. I can double check by submitting it through edk2 CI to
> ensure it works. Current CI version is already GCC 12.

It's the binutils version that matters for this.

(And even if CI has gcc-12, I'd still ask for the macros, because RHEL9
/ EPEL9 don't seem to have a new enough binutils.)

Thanks
Laszlo

> 
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 5:47 PM Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com
> <mailto:lersek@redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 10/19/23 11:22, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>     > On 10/19/23 08:48, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> 
>     >> (11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than
>     >> magic constants, but raw encodings of machine instructions don't
>     belong
>     >> into a
>     >>      C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced
>     thinking what
>     >> if all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in
>     >> edk2 GCC 12 supports it
>     >>      we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it
>     easy and
>     >> simple to consume for others.
>     >
>     > To be honest, I can't determine the minimum expected gcc version for
>     > edk2. "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template" states a minimum version for
>     > NASM, for example, but I can't find a similar gcc requirement there.
>     >
>     > gcc-12 does work for me personally, because my riscv cross-compiler is
>     > "riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat Cross
>     12.1.1-1)".
>     >
>     > If the CI environment that builds these patches also provides gcc-12+,
>     > then I figure you should be set.
> 
>     Wait, for the assembly language source files, what matters is the
>     binutils version, not the gcc version. Mine is "GNU assembler version
>     2.38-3.el9" (from "binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu-2.38-3.el9.x86_64").
> 
>     Is that sufficient for the instuctions in question?
> 
>     (More generally -- what version does our CI env expect / provide?)
> 
>     Thanks
>     Laszlo
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks!
> =D



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109816): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109816
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/7686176
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/12367111/7686176/1913456212/xyzzy [rebecca@openfw.io]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-