From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a; helo=mail-wm0-x22a.google.com; envelope-from=pete@akeo.ie; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-wm0-x22a.google.com (mail-wm0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22a]) (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 5603322436941 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:08:29 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id q83so4596120wme.5 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:14:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akeo-ie.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=riNnnV1mAIEliC9OlyXU+0DNQKU0+8iMWcWyKdjGUpI=; b=q9oqOMbFCnZhChnYKiYVihAX4ZULyleKR0kzWzMIp8MqylRL6ZdpldP5qGNZ7zuC9i qLxxEdjSIS3w1AROHGA8Xpprk5Q09iIBcG3a10xq5DHDL/1OGW93uzfBANC1TPwya+9X xbG412JJ1n7deNNqwgn8mUcW/kZ9rJT05YxoeoZb2SLkSiaiafT2GkHe0WuHJFSgjSK6 OZ/uRhlkMPPl8M9h9DCSteHwmbqtFAXISEpMZVrwRahpOUb3ZFistVC1uv43Ds1tLtCB Bw/PP/QXBnmtpDdnlWSA//C3JJBtNJ04y2tH+t5upXTe1rvylTBUfeOqrxgzCP5ltQKM 1M7Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=riNnnV1mAIEliC9OlyXU+0DNQKU0+8iMWcWyKdjGUpI=; b=c0tMZX/GQA5ntOIn+sOSVcqpa7SIjit32UZ8mbSNVR96sqWeB4CguI9T7IsQ10c3jB pZtgtTXt+/iWPlWN9icD6OyhrwoArCzoUs6J1mIWo6PvUIEJbujFiEUU6guVSaLGTFiK TviQhTy/P4vou1Np4GSASUFRWywzvW/Z1Fu8US5EFl2WjcQUQODKdt+Qgq02Im1t0Cn9 BV0bIXFFGJwo5bklhPl8asrZb0fxDBKc+kvkqG03leLijYt+Cu2uvL2FAcDlLbLdK7WK ep2r+gFKEt1NbfzDYnBWNW0QVq1e7pvwLG2/Q9cr+EvqqpARkrNfQXIR6g0prNmJyyhi m7ZA== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBPkq4jJhz4RsVywHJTLIg2gVpcvA0pbCTc8Q6Dk4AtK+CfoYzy tmLiz7nvQ8v8mFpzlbs+d6xBMF+GKgA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224VRBsnkdmKEWxBeWDYzy+qwCZw/J604yT+LCYGzGMv+kujFseuVM29bQyZxGagbkJMgccXRQ== X-Received: by 10.80.154.129 with SMTP id p1mr2802239edb.211.1519391670083; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:14:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.101] ([84.203.54.151]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 33sm2327585edz.37.2018.02.23.05.14.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:14:29 -0800 (PST) To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Gao, Liming" References: <20180223095003.6012-1-pete@akeo.ie> From: Pete Batard Message-ID: <686593a9-d2f5-75a9-0430-c07de5a7dfa6@akeo.ie> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:14:28 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add ARM64 support for VS2017 X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:08:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2018.02.23 11:55, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> * PATCH 4 enables the selection of ARM64 in the conf templates. >> One item of note is that the build options for ARM64 are the same as >> for ARM, except for /BASE:0 which was removed to avoid error: >> 'invalid base address 0x0; ARM64 image cannot have base address below 4GB' >> > > This series looks fine to me, with the exception of the error > mentioned here, which seems strange to me. It does appear to be a > toolchain issue rather than anything else, so if you can build working > binaries with these patches, it's all fine by me. Thanks Ard. The thing about /BASE:0 producing a LNK1355 error above is that it only seems to occur with applications (you will see it if you try to build the Shell or MdeModulePkg\Application\HelloWorld for instance) and not drivers. I too suspect that this may have to do with the public-facing VS2017/ARM64 toolchain being brand new, since it was only introduced with the last major VS update, and maybe still needing some ironing out when it comes to the generation of non Windows applications. So far I have not seen any ill effects from the removal of /BASE:0. Once this series has been integrated (so that it's easier for the VS dev team to test), I'll try to report this issue to https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com, to find out what they have to say about it. Regards, /Pete