On 2 August 2016 at 17:02, Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2 August 2016 at 17:01, Leif Lindholm <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 04:39:30PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> In order to be able to share the compiler flags with the linker (which >>> is required for LTO since it involves the linker doing code generation >>> based on the LTO bytecode), move the -c GCC argument to the build rules, >>> and drop it from the GCC CC_FLAGS definitions in tools_def. >>> >>> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0 >>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> BaseTools/Conf/build_rule.template | 16 +++++++++------- >>> BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template | 10 +++++----- >>> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/BaseTools/Conf/build_rule.template >>> b/BaseTools/Conf/build_rule.template >>> index 9adf3918e42e..7d9f8ca075c2 100644 >>> --- a/BaseTools/Conf/build_rule.template >>> +++ b/BaseTools/Conf/build_rule.template >>> @@ -130,7 +130,10 @@ >>> <Command.MSFT, Command.INTEL> >>> "$(CC)" /Fo${dst} $(CC_FLAGS) $(INC) ${src} >>> >>> - <Command.GCC, Command.GCCLD, Command.RVCT> >>> + <Command.GCC, Command.GCCLD> >>> + "$(CC)" $(CC_FLAGS) -c -o ${dst} $(INC) ${src} >>> + >>> + <Command.RVCT> >> >> Apart from the slightly larger patch set, is there any reason not to >> split out the RVCT handling here and fix up tools_def.template for it >> too? >>
OK, i get it now. That actually simplifies the patch, since I don't need to split off RVCT in build_rules then _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
