From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::229; helo=mail-wm0-x229.google.com; envelope-from=pete@akeo.ie; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-wm0-x229.google.com (mail-wm0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::229]) (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 69969221523A1 for ; Mon, 4 Dec 2017 09:39:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x229.google.com with SMTP id g130so15644094wme.0 for ; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:43:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akeo-ie.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=uRKQ5m+B1BzO6LnBW0j1kB1s6O42gErUPdy/LC1mrKU=; b=S+H/kWVNDNYeLJyZjAtKsKOuvhkbLrRw6QwDtMfbyBn+Bd6SaetuKgwcXuQbV7BUdw +DaE2PNA8GBCREESQikOxxr4K67eQJHrn1vRmI9kpLoDp0CqMBMO3RU9wdTfbVmamwtp OWojHwazWRxloFCc+/DSl5XqvF+rE9B4tZzTUDzg1P6ZMn4OgRXQ7w59qnzz4rzYqTtU LiSc8Ycbtn0Ch4FL9dg/RcMBscDoLW9gd3I0C9cD8pBVYMa/DLOOkMIkNXLEaRFhH+fX MpHHDjpFG3eOGD65kTuL0hbRvMIW1b8j81SX/f4a22/O6yq3H/bEMk/vS3zRS03HF4NU SzHg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uRKQ5m+B1BzO6LnBW0j1kB1s6O42gErUPdy/LC1mrKU=; b=tHa7cbxCJfte1m5SoZJVG8aHPKIH+FrhcwZyqzoUWnb+BfwroqldmFZ6yLBJGOBs+2 mwMt9abZrLx3GgmpUVZEp9jFVnLCaHI1YrUKbUG9Z69oK0zMU/IuZrQZMs0Qf8jsncg4 n5icyA4n2uCHVFgYMm4jABhmzhaDE5LJHFIFDwH7R5G1OkmRexeTMVyrIaCBlIh3iWPo WDZiywVGXUK+FBJ0dFFpdUEgM7G2JMbEeOYe3Vr7yUmgnNtrdZn+AGTrEMc4XLaHMp2l w++Xb9opFRwUh2ursqA7zEQiOTBDQ8Mmf1fcbE7WI6HoHspiNUKlSlmpXlBv16VVKedy 8ntw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX5DpTZzoEjBgE96qGKp4L+f8vnYXbpWtNaUCiKRBofFrsgyjYly ylhD+Db7KPMM+tHHjrOfWKEsEw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZJ+BSnB/nAEoU+ladKtkvUwWGIHQO3CEfcE/bCboLyFEXGeQNAgyETPOQ0YYYo73Ghf/yyAA== X-Received: by 10.80.136.228 with SMTP id d91mr31328480edd.296.1512409421115; Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:43:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.101] ([84.203.42.156]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id k18sm5964947eda.20.2017.12.04.09.43.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Dec 2017 09:43:40 -0800 (PST) To: "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Gao, Liming" References: <20171204131205.11304-1-pete@akeo.ie> <20171204131205.11304-7-pete@akeo.ie> <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E189D15@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Pete Batard Message-ID: Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2017 17:43:39 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E189D15@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] BaseTools/Conf: Add VS2017/ARM support X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 17:39:12 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2017.12.04 15:48, Gao, Liming wrote: > 1. You add new build for ARM. I remember the reason is that --convert-hex can't be used by trim for ARM ASM file. Right? That is correct. Maybe there's a better option to achieve just that, as duplicating the whole section just to remove an option seems a bit of an overkill... > 2. On tools_def.txt. Why introduce /D_ARM_WINAPI_PARTITION_DESKTOP_SDK_AVAILABLE option? The MSFT toolchain for ARM actively prevents compilation of native applications, when using Microsoft headers, unless this value is defined. If that is not the case, you get the error: "Compiling Desktop applications for the ARM platform is not supported." So this was needed when we were still using Microsoft headers for stdarg.h, as compilation would break otherwise. However, now that we are no longer relying on any standard headers from the VS toolchain, I just confirmed that the option is no longer needed (as the check for this definition is done in one of the Microsoft headers, not the compiler). I will therefore remove that option, as it is no longer needed. Regards, /Pete