From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233; helo=mail-it0-x233.google.com; envelope-from=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-it0-x233.google.com (mail-it0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::233]) (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 465012205B91A for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:52:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it0-x233.google.com with SMTP id u62so8468745ita.2 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:58:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fmsdmDZV+nZLP+shLUOYwz+F7KR7FQbuLJqJ5XzjgGs=; b=MAi+5BWy+EfcEtcYxQqf/AJmrxAvVqObosES0gxLwB79/ItqhuJXAxvcSbjIRnZ+Zs qjZ1eGnkNrpRfp3wG1KNEEjvh64YNn+8nWYDhfk5sCyWcpuq2xCuQQKvT7LKvIxa4nWm zppAW9v+ldzl8vmmXl+yOVcV1f3hqOr40P0H0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fmsdmDZV+nZLP+shLUOYwz+F7KR7FQbuLJqJ5XzjgGs=; b=byGe4m1fBX3i7kosi02YFax/FLVYXMSANUZ6iS3aztATqhIYiDk9LlV8zXkowSOUUj MwzfvCIBZ4QbJBMxNuCGADJOk0dDdSuzr0+TYbxFy5QoPXWaK4lQrYeCg9h09bl3+IOL yF6wcamUwoUfVEMEwUSFRcsHeMbCceJt4Cs8lTr49LjCYNf890X6vS8gYD++48fE5CFF hlp/P1wduM4ft8d6wAKDpwcEGYB5SAjX54cWBR5QY/JLMkbfn1LIES5ed+x9tb4+PsD2 Xud6geF9DV0owvuX+05WHfgN9FrfD6TKipLpHQpuHwAkWkuGFIQSOJJudun5p4TROiTy S09A== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytfkZHqkR3LQ6TT9yGD/jPjtJBDoL35K1723+eYaYiUap68QOcMG tgAEc3wgpjOCvudEmSPGwdsrMqJwKm5kEVTabgIDHA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBouEe5BOvzCxWYEISv54z0VII9h+O9lET0XBi19eAigWFPaiHmDAtsbzgto67Ex7qAeHkjWFwsuynvf62P0og4g= X-Received: by 10.36.224.141 with SMTP id c135mr4190066ith.34.1515751093815; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:58:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.37.197 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:58:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20180110162644.11208-1-pete@akeo.ie> <20180110162644.11208-5-pete@akeo.ie> <5ccd6f32-ee75-57e2-75f0-1fe14cba6b05@akeo.ie> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:58:12 +0000 Message-ID: To: "Cohen, Eugene" Cc: Pete Batard , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Gao, Liming" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] ArmPkg/Library/CompilerIntrinsicsLib: Enable VS2017/ARM builds 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, 12 Jan 2018 09:53:00 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11 January 2018 at 16:56, Cohen, Eugene wrote: > Pete, > >> How about I modify the patch to use "AREA s_" >> instead of "AREA Math" as per the current proposal? > > That's how it used to work before the macro was introduced, per commit dc= b2e4bb61931e2dee1739bb76aba315002f0a82 two years ago. > > I personally have no problem going back to the individual AREA s_ = approach now that we have a good reason to do so. > >> Also, you'll notice that the current div.asm [1], which is used by RVCT = does >> *not* rely on the macro, so, unless this is intentional, there already s= eems >> to exist inconsistencies with regards to using the RVCT_ASM_EXPORT >> macro to ensure the removal of dead code... > > I think this was likely an oversight. > >> So, to summarise, I would much prefer if we could keep most of the >> current patch, and simply use the following where needed: >> >> AREA s___aeabi_ldivmod, CODE, READONLY, ARM AREA s___aeabi_llsr, >> CODE, READONLY, ARM AREA s___aeabi_uldivmod, CODE, READONLY, >> ARM >> > > Agreed, this is fine so long as we agree on the definition of "where need= ed". In general I would expect each independent assembly function to have = its own AREA directive (e.g. math functions). In some cases there will cle= arly be a collection of dependent functions that would be better served by = a single area directive (e.g. MMU initialization functions). > > Much Thanks! > > Eugene > Agreed.