On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:41 PM Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com> wrote: > > On 3/28/23 7:19 PM, gaoliming wrote: > > > GCC49 is one GCC tool chain without LTO enable option. GCC5 is another GCC > > tool chain with LTO enable option. > > > > They have the different usage. I suggest to keep GCC49 and GCC5 both, and > > also keep their name as is. > > Is anything still _using_ GCC49 though? Since I strongly suspect nobody > is using gcc 4.9, I'll rename it to GCCNOLTO.
As expressed off-list on UEFI talkbox, I like GCCNOLTO, but I would rather keep GCC5 as GCC5, for the next future iteration of "lets bump a new toolchain because we need feature X". > > When I try and build OVMF with it, I get the following error: > > > /UefiShellDebug1CommandsLib/SmbiosView/PrintInfo.c > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/OvmfPkg/Library/BaseMemEncryptSevLib/X64/SnpPageStateChangeInternal.c: > In function ‘InternalSetPageState’: > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/OvmfPkg/Library/BaseMemEncryptSevLib/X64/SnpPageStateChangeInternal.c:166:37: > error: ‘Cmd’ may be used uninitialized in this function > [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] > 166 | Info->Entry[i].CurrentPage = 0; > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~ > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/OvmfPkg/Library/BaseMemEncryptSevLib/X64/SnpPageStateChangeInternal.c:32:10: > note: ‘Cmd’ was declared here > 32 | UINTN Cmd; > | ^~~ > rm -f > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/Build/OvmfX64/RELEASE_GCC49/X64/NetworkPkg/Library/DxeIpIoLib/DxeIpIoLib/OUTPUT/DxeIpIoLib.lib > "ar" cr > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/Build/OvmfX64/RELEASE_GCC49/X64/NetworkPkg/Library/DxeIpIoLib/DxeIpIoLib/OUTPUT/DxeIpIoLib.lib > @/home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/Build/OvmfX64/RELEASE_GCC49/X64/NetworkPkg/Library/DxeIpIoLib/DxeIpIoLib/OUTPUT/object_files.lst > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors > make: *** [GNUmakefile:304: > /home/bcran/src/uefi/edk2/Build/OvmfX64/RELEASE_GCC49/X64/OvmfPkg/Library/BaseMemEncryptSevLib/PeiMemEncryptSevLib/OUTPUT/X64/SnpPageStateChangeInternal.obj] > Error 1 This is unsurprising, plenty of NOLTO build breakage. Since no one seems to use this, could we think about axing this or? Just seems silly to have an extra toolchain (with extra cognitive overhead for anyone looking at tools_def) for s/-flto//g -- Pedro -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#102365): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/102365 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/97919856/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
