From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mout01.posteo.de (mout01.posteo.de [185.67.36.65])
 by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web08.6998.1634202812458518840
 for <devel@edk2.groups.io>;
 Thu, 14 Oct 2021 02:13:33 -0700
Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io;
 dkim=fail reason="body hash did not verify" header.i=@posteo.de header.s=2017 header.b=EEneMW5o;
 spf=pass (domain: posteo.de, ip: 185.67.36.65, mailfrom: mhaeuser@posteo.de)
Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) 
	by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 29C2A240026
	for <devel@edk2.groups.io>; Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:13:27 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.de; s=2017;
	t=1634202808; bh=klKw34Mk95NxU4jK2234AN3IL37m8j0pHQaACKvZOX0=;
	h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:From:From;
	b=EEneMW5oQw8i/bTwmb2fjQICDRGRX8Y9Ab5slMDFzota4X7gfP44y2gyxZnNSMOPJ
	 iFp9CXTgPmJgTfmPiPS8oqxu+ds/F7pnTrH4yvth2QHWHOMZ4CLP02JVmWEL+mEsVa
	 YyilxJB68X2BLNKkhTfzjdVEOE2EfI0T2+6pl9EX6kcgUZT4dJRRyzi7QBhfUZ2mw8
	 VW2T6QDFLoWhoLYxLz30dnUGRYJETtJ95hsudwPeAMTHY68r92WPgOGVGZOYlBe6Kr
	 Idr0aNJ9CPOJDfohUtA2LjIZU5Mmdp+MlZUCJ/ql8kYG1JhSae2mtBWEwdk2URztk+
	 neSiD2PDOULaQ==
Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4HVNx24pmNz9rxQ;
	Thu, 14 Oct 2021 11:13:26 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <9139bc01-3cb1-fe05-c2f8-ea29fbbb1729@posteo.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2021 09:13:26 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v1 1/1] StandaloneMmPkg: To support CLANGPDB build
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, ardb@kernel.org
Cc: "Shi, Steven" <steven.shi@intel.com>,
 "Yang, JiyangX" <jiyangx.yang@intel.com>,
 Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+tianocore@kernel.org>,
 Sami Mujawar <sami.mujawar@arm.com>, "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@intel.com>,
 Supreeth Venkatesh <supreeth.venkatesh@arm.com>,
 Vitaly Cheptsov <vit9696@protonmail.com>
References: <20211014031235.1839-1-jiyangx.yang@intel.com>
 <20211014031235.1839-2-jiyangx.yang@intel.com>
 <71754204-38e7-09c5-3d83-ba090d393552@posteo.de>
 <DM4PR11MB55490EC4B5AB54FC7716D5A98CB89@DM4PR11MB5549.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <62e21365-66cf-353e-b139-cb8c64aa4fd7@posteo.de>
 <CAMj1kXHkMy_OX-ZC45WpOB3aoegTryT2H+0rwyw1cXnfrOZ8Lw@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFydmluIEjDpHVzZXI=?= <mhaeuser@posteo.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXHkMy_OX-ZC45WpOB3aoegTryT2H+0rwyw1cXnfrOZ8Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hey Ard,

Thanks for commenting!

On 14.10.21 11:09, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 11:08, Marvin H=C3=A4user <mhaeuser@posteo.de> wro=
te:
>> Hey Steven,
>>
>> As I said, I prefer my patch, but this would work too of course.
>> I talked about the PIE stuff with Ard before, so maybe he has an opinion
>> on this? :)
>>
>> (Small correction for my last e-mail, of course we are not *guaranteed*
>> there are *no* relocations in .text, but they'd all point to GOT (or
>> whatever else the target uses for PIE), and references will probably be
>> relative; for ARM architectures I remember Ard talking about specific
>> kinds of relocations being avoided entirely).
>>
> Hello all,
>
> As I understand it, we are talking about a native PE/COFF toolchain
> here that does not rely on GenFw for ELF to PE/COFF conversion, right?

Yep.

> If so, there is no way the self-relocation is going to work anyway, so
> whether we pass -fpie or not for AArch64 is immaterial here.

It's not quite, because with -fpie it errors (also maybe PE/COFF PIE=20
will be supported some day?). We can also pass -fno-pie and have some=20
other way to kill compilation for CLANGPDB ARM/AARCH64, but it must not=20
just silently succeed when this is eventually supported.

Best regards,
Marvin

>
>
>=20
>
>