Hi Liming, Apologies if I have caused confusion (since we have been discussing the same bug on both patches). This patch is *not* required for the stable tag. It will be useful to include *after* the stable tag.
The intrinsics patch on its own resolves the problem (by providing resolutions for the generated function calls), whereas *this* patch tells GCC 10.2 or later (not yet released) not to generate those calls in the first place. Best Regards, Leif On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 15:10:07 +0000, Gao, Liming wrote: > Ard: > Lefi requests to catch this change into 202005 stable tag. I also > highlight this request in hard feature freeze notice mail > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60421. > > If no objection before the middle of next week (2020-06-03), this > patch can be merged with the updated comments. > > Thanks > Liming > > -----Original Message----- > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > > Biesheuvel > > Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 12:51 AM > > To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > > ler...@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > > Cc: phi...@redhat.com; mli...@suse.cz; Kinney, Michael D > > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; af...@apple.com > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable outline > > atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > > > On 5/29/20 4:29 PM, Gao, Liming wrote: > > > Ard: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > > >> Biesheuvel > > >> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2020 1:47 PM > > >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; > > >> ler...@redhat.com; Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > > >> Cc: phi...@redhat.com; mli...@suse.cz > > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable > > >> outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > >> > > >> On 5/29/20 5:18 AM, Liming Gao via groups.io wrote: > > >>> Leif: > > >>> I get the point that the linux distribution default GCC version may > > >>> be 10 or above. Without this fix, those developers can’t pass > > >> build edk2-stable202005. So, you think this is a critical issue to catch > > >> stable tag 202005. > > >>> > > >>> Ard: > > >>> For this patch, I have two minor comments. > > >>> 1) I suggest to remove Link: > > >>> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2723 from comments, > > >>> because this information has > > >> been in the commit message. > > >> > > >> I think it would be helpful to keep it but I won't insist. > > >> > > > > > > I agree this is useful. But, we record it in the commit message. I prefer > > > to remove this link from source code. > > > With this change, Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming....@intel.com> > > > > > > > > > Works for me. > > > > I will send a v2 after the stable tag is released. > > > > > > >>> 2) Can we think __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined? Do we need to check > > >>> its value after check whether it is defined or not? > > >>> > > >> > > >> Yes __GNUC_MINOR__ is always defined. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Laszlo > > >>> Ersek > > >>> Sent: 2020年5月29日 4:03 > > >>> To: Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com> > > >>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@arm.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, > > >>> Liming <liming....@intel.com>; phi...@redhat.com; > > >> mli...@suse.cz > > >>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] MdePkg/Include: AARCH64: disable > > >>> outline atomics on GCC 10.2+ > > >>> > > >>> On 05/28/20 12:05, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > >>>> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:12:23 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > >>>>>>>> Oh and I think both this patch and the assembly language > > >>>>>>>> implementation for the atomics should be delayed after the stable > > >>>>>>>> tag. gcc-10 is a new toolchain; so even if we don't introduce a > > >>>>>>>> new toolchain tag such as > > >>>>>>>> GCC10 for it, whatever we do in order to make it work, that's > > >>>>>>>> feature enablement in my book. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Works for me. By the time the next stable tag comes around, early > > >>>>>>> adopters that are now on GCC 10.1 will likely have moved to 10.2 by > > >>>>>>> that time, and so we may not need the assembly patch at all. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I'm not ecstatic that we'll be releasing the first stable tag known > > >>>>>> to break with current toolchains. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> If this breakage affects "current toolchains", then why was > > >>>>> <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2723> only reported > > >>>>> on 2020-May-19, four days into the soft feature freeze? > > >>>> > > >>>> I agree the timing is crap. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> This isn't just affecting random crazies pulling latest toolchains > > >>>>>> down, but people using their distro defaults (native or cross). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ... "people using their distro defaults" to *not* build upstream edk2 > > >>>>> until 2020-May-19, apparently. > > >>>> > > >>>> Or distro defaults changing in between. I mean, we could say "Arch is > > >>>> the same as any other distro's unstable", but I wouldn't want to go > > >>>> down that route - I know people who use it for developing also for > > >>>> qemu and linux. > > >>>> > > >>>> Argh, I also just realised the error report I saw two days after Ard's > > >>>> intrinsics patch hit the list was not a public report. Yes, if this > > >>>> had affected only in-development/unstable distributions, I agree this > > >>>> isn't something we should try to deal with upstream. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> I don't recall if 10.1 ended up being default in F32, but it was > > >>>>>> definitely included. In Arch, it does appear default. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Debian/Ubuntu are unaffected in their stable releases. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I agree it's a transitional issue, but I would really prefer to have > > >>>>>> the intrinsics included in the release. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> OK, let's delay the release then, by a few days. I agree the present > > >>>>> patch may qualify as a bugfix, but the other patch with the assembly > > >>>>> language intrinsics doesn't. If it's really that important to have in > > >>>>> the upcoming stable tag, then it's worth delaying the tag for. I'm > > >>>>> fine delaying the release for it; it wouldn't be without precedent. > > >>>> > > >>>> I would argue it *is* a bugfix, since it only has an effect on builds > > >>>> that would otherwise fail. > > >>> > > >>> OK. That's a good argument. From my POV, feel free to merge (both > > >>> patches). > > >>> > > >>> Thanks > > >>> Laszlo > > >>> > > >>>> But I also do think it is important enough to delay the release if we > > >>>> feel that is necessary. > > >>>> > > >>>> / > > >>>> Leif > > >>>> > > >>>>> Also, I think Ard's assembly language patch needs a Tested-by from > > >>>>> Gary at the least (reporter of TianoCore#2723). Please reach out to > > >>>>> him in that thread. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> ... More precisely, please *ping* Gary for a Tested-by in that > > >>>>> thread, because Ard CC'd him from the start, and even credited Gary > > >>>>> in the commit message. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>> Laszlo > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#60471): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60471 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/74396053/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
