On 2 August 2016 at 12:57, Laszlo Ersek <[email protected]> wrote: > On 08/02/16 11:03, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 1 August 2016 at 10:01, Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> This v5 to introduce GCC5 is now a 8 piece series, including some >>> preparatory cleanup patches that allow all GCC4x and CLANG35 toolchains >>> to switch to using 'gcc' as the linker. This allows us to get rid of >>> the wrapper script to marshall ld arguments in order to make them >>> understandable by gcc, which is fragile and likely to cause problems in >>> the future. >>> >>> Since there appears to be a natural split between the 'legacy' GCC >>> toolchains UNIXGCC, ELFGCC, and CYGGCC[xASL], both in term of supported >>> architectures [IA32, X64, IPF] vs [IA32, X64, ARM, AARCH64], and in >>> terms of maintenance, these toolchains are not moved to using 'gcc' as >>> the linker, and instead, a new BUILDRULEFAMILY is introduced called GCCLD >>> that will retain the old behavior. >>> >>> The result is that GCC5 can align much more closely with its predecessors, >>> making the expected maintenance burden of supporting GCC back to v4.4 >>> much lower. >>> >>> Changes since v4: >>> - added patch to use 'protected' visibility only for the libraries that >>> define the module entry points (_ModuleEntryPoint), to prevent them from >>> being optimized away by the LTO routines >>> - added Jordan's ack/RBs >>> - add some extra comments to tools_def.template (#8) >>> >> >> Thanks all. Committed as >> >> 1c63516075b3 BaseTools CLANG35: drop problematic use-movt and save-temps >> options >> ff54bcdf2e4e ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtPrePiUniCoreRelocatable: ignore .hash >> and .note sections >> befb3ba51502 BaseTools UNIXGCC ELFGCC CYGGCC: clone GCC build rule >> family into GCCLD >> a1b8baccc30b BaseTools GCC: use 'gcc' as the linker command for GCC44 and >> later >> e1458aaded8e ArmPkg: add prebuilt glue binaries for GCC5 LTO support >> 7fd5d619806d BaseTools GCC: drop GNU notes section from EFI image >> 4a8466d4baba BaseTools GCC: introduce GCC5 toolchain to support GCC >> v5.x in LTO mode >> >> with Leif and Liming's R-b. I dropped patch #7, and instead made the >> visibility pragma conditional on whether LTO is disabled. > > Re gcc-5, do we need a patch for "OvmfPkg/build.sh" now? See also > <https://tianocore.acgmultimedia.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62>. >
Yes, I suppose so. _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
