From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d41; helo=mail-io1-xd41.google.com; envelope-from=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-io1-xd41.google.com (mail-io1-xd41.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d41]) (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 B609721962301 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 03:34:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd41.google.com with SMTP id v10so2825479ios.13 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 03:34:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=hcdEkCVFIamp0uaZRVDnkxsxTxCvW0aDgJnmLm7C/kM=; b=VYaeSDhhvw8rwqLd8DnBjXzlFaWttBistkMf6dr8tXXofEO01YR0wnYalj8ye7+jQ/ o8NA4YNMIx33N8gXhmZiD0zmlK6Cz0XOqTAnIsc5BTz7UvCEVeNCFfVM68Dm+VwQA2BX vpKKxXtdwg7deGg9KmMKOcxBfEpWVyDCUPBvg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=hcdEkCVFIamp0uaZRVDnkxsxTxCvW0aDgJnmLm7C/kM=; b=fuVYbPy97+EL6SA/bCmRdLv5xHQ5zN+wzGeEEKzcTtAmt0SOsnUhSNW20elDaG2MEJ U2/ogrMAIQRbq0h3FNYLaNAqKGUQeRQ1e+3CCOH/4oSg5WJV4Is8+g2CUP8/MMdBPgoh v8/2hqKMvR/GlezZyVSewdkmu+rULfqXIr2809dr4fmmRjPsdjpUKu8jAfGZftaCvQJP H807WI/h/Ms7oD3WtL3HlegMGEClljPsuYKBiyQSKPlyrda1EZTNhgRvdpHp+2wXJQQz ahfZ27zkKrNeHIXSL9vOeo/XdEMdFbUw2/qrYF/m2C0GInSeOwFbdF9khHfRM0T2uBPk 35Kw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukcCIPvohxu2j8DhaaMHDirgrATQIPaoJ7jbgdd0vYEuq4b/HDr6 HfsGegvjJau9MG/pm3sUBbY9bCNUJogRnzcjbbbwTg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN6WylcqeQ17qFZRjXIU6RBUKq65cbxDZdPzA7wmnSlBFYOvfvXucZwWRuh+Y1Z8+YwmNHHKNOzLMPJNDrYxV9I= X-Received: by 2002:a5e:c206:: with SMTP id v6mr825724iop.60.1546947285659; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 03:34:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190103024816.9236-1-lersek@redhat.com> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E3AD113@SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com> <020b38a7-cb17-aa75-1054-a91e7adee32a@redhat.com> <8903ff0b-b822-13d1-6a17-52e18e915ba7@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <8903ff0b-b822-13d1-6a17-52e18e915ba7@redhat.com> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 12:34:33 +0100 Message-ID: To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: "Gao, Liming" , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu=2DDaud=C3=A9?= , edk2-devel-01 , "Qian, Yi" , "Ye, Ting" , "Justen, Jordan L" , "Ni, Ray" , "Kinney, Michael D" , Anthony Perard 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 11:34:46 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 02:54, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > 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. > Thanks a lot for this to the both of you.