From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=209.132.183.28; helo=mx1.redhat.com; envelope-from=lersek@redhat.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D69FD21A07A92 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2019 17:54:30 -0800 (PST) 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 mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B89BB3D966; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 01:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-126-62.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.126.62]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F887C80C; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 01:54:23 +0000 (UTC) From: Laszlo Ersek To: "Gao, Liming" , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , edk2-devel-01 Cc: "Qian, Yi" , "Ye, Ting" , "Justen, Jordan L" , "Ni, Ray" , Anthony Perard , "Kinney, Michael D" References: <20190103024816.9236-1-lersek@redhat.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E3AD113@SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com> <020b38a7-cb17-aa75-1054-a91e7adee32a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <8903ff0b-b822-13d1-6a17-52e18e915ba7@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 02:54:23 +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: <020b38a7-cb17-aa75-1054-a91e7adee32a@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Tue, 08 Jan 2019 01:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] remove the GCC44 through GCC47 toolchains X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 01:54:31 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 01/07/19 19:08, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 01/07/19 13:15, Gao, Liming wrote: >> Laszlo: >> This patch set is good to me. Reviewed-by: Liming Gao > > Many thanks to everyone for the quick reviews! > >> Besides this patch set, I suggest to let GCC48/GCC49/GCC5 refer to the common GCC_ flags. After I remove ELFGCC/UNIXGCC/CYGGCC tool chain, I will update GCC_ flags to be same to current GCC48_ flags, then remove GCC48_ flag definition. > > Sounds good to me, thanks. IIRC I actually looked into calling that > stuff just GCC_, but I seem to remember that the subject macros were > already defined for other purposes. Once you eliminate > ELFGCC/UNIXGCC/CYGGCC, hopefully all those macros can be collapsed. > > For this series, I plan to go through the feedback tags in detail, > shortly, and push the series if everything is sufficiently approved. That appears to be the case, so I've pushed the series: commit range 46f4c9677c61..7423ba9d499b. Thank you all again, Laszlo