From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=192.55.52.151; helo=mga17.intel.com; envelope-from=michael.d.kinney@intel.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) (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 7266F21E4904D for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 12:54:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Mar 2018 13:00:30 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,466,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="38535475" Received: from orsmsx109.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.240.7]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Mar 2018 13:00:29 -0700 Received: from orsmsx116.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.14) by ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com (10.22.240.7) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:00:29 -0700 Received: from orsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.9.121]) by ORSMSX116.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.69]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:00:29 -0700 From: "Kinney, Michael D" To: "Gao, Liming" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Kinney, Michael D" Thread-Topic: [RFC] Remove X86 .asm and .S assembly files in EDK2 Thread-Index: AdOaeaGNXzeD3yDLSdiX/XGJTnXSdwgi5XNA Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:00:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E1B9F76@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E1B9F76@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.139] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove X86 .asm and .S assembly files in EDK2 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: Tue, 13 Mar 2018 19:54:08 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Liming, After further evaluation on use of NASM with macho there are a couple issues that need to be resolved before the .asm and .S files can be removed from all components. The details are at: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D881 NASM issues to be resolved are: https://bugzilla.nasm.us/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3392469 https://bugzilla.nasm.us/show_bug.cgi?id=3D3392470 The recommendation is to not switch to NASM only for libraries until the dead code stripping feature works as expected on macho. We can consider moving to NASM only for NASM files in a module if there are no NASM functions that would be dead stripped. The recommendation for these types of NASM files is do not use the following pragma until the NASM issues above are resolved. %pragma macho subsections_via_symbols Best regards, Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel- > bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Gao, Liming > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 3:06 AM > To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org > Subject: [edk2] [RFC] Remove X86 .asm and .S assembly > files in EDK2 >=20 > Edk2 has used nasm assembly file for all tool chains. > So, IA32 and X64 .asm and .S assembly files can be > removed if their nasm files are ready. It can save the > maintain effort and avoid the confuse. >=20 >=20 >=20 > If you have any comments on this change, please let me > know. >=20 > Thanks > Liming > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel