Mike: I think build performance is also a key point. I prefer to add this option in NOOPT target. After add this option, we can build edk2 packages to detect those duplicated issues.
Thanks Liming >-----Original Message----- >From: edk2-devel [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >Kinney, Michael D >Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 6:48 AM >To: Laszlo Ersek <[email protected]>; Ard Biesheuvel ><[email protected]>; Andrew Fish ([email protected]) ><[email protected]>; Kinney, Michael D <[email protected]> >Cc: Wu, Hao A <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Fan, Jeff ><[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [edk2] [Patch] SourceLevelDebugPkg/SecPeiDebugAgentLib: Fix >duplicate symbol > >Laszlo, > >The other idea I have is for MSFT tool chains to do the DLINK step twice. Once >with /WHOLEARCHIVE set to a .dll that is not used in later steps, but the doing >the DLINK action detects duplicate symbols. > >If the first DLINK step passes, then so a second DLINK step to a .dll without >/WHOLEARCHIVE set and use this .dll to produce the .efi file that goes into the >FW image. > >This 2 step link process would have the side effect of potentially increasing >build times, but could be done for specific tool chain families in >build_rules.txt. > >The first DLINK step could also disable a lot of the optimizations that take >longer since the goal of this step is only to detect a duplicate symbol. > >Best regards, > >Mike > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: edk2-devel [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >Laszlo >> Ersek >> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 1:11 PM >> To: Kinney, Michael D <[email protected]>; Ard Biesheuvel >> <[email protected]>; Andrew Fish ([email protected]) ><[email protected]> >> Cc: Wu, Hao A <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Fan, Jeff >> <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [edk2] [Patch] SourceLevelDebugPkg/SecPeiDebugAgentLib: >Fix >> duplicate symbol >> >> On 05/25/17 21:57, Kinney, Michael D wrote: >> > Laszlo, >> > >> > I have the same concern on final image sizes. I have done some >> > evaluation: >> > >> > GCC5 OVMF X64 DEBUG without -whole-archive >> > ========================================== >> > FV Space Information >> > SECFV [19%Full] 212992 total, 42000 used, 170992 free >> > FVMAIN_COMPACT [33%Full] 3440640 total, 1162760 used, 2277880 free >> > DXEFV [38%Full] 10485760 total, 4024024 used, 6461736 free >> > PEIFV [19%Full] 917504 total, 180648 used, 736856 free >> > Total used = 5409432 >> > >> > GCC5 OVMF X64 DEBUG with -whole-archive >> > ======================================= >> > FV Space Information >> > SECFV [19%Full] 212992 total, 41936 used, 171056 free >> > FVMAIN_COMPACT [33%Full] 3440640 total, 1158304 used, 2282336 free >> > DXEFV [38%Full] 10485760 total, 4029656 used, 6456104 free >> > PEIFV [19%Full] 917504 total, 181352 used, 736152 free >> > Total used = 5411248 >> > >> > Total used difference = 1816 bytes larger with -whole-archive >> > >> > I was also able to do a MSFT VS2015 build with /WHOLEARCHIVE set >> > and it also catches the same duplicate symbol error now. >> > >> > error C2220: warning treated as error - no 'executable' file generated >> > warning C4744: 'mMemoryDiscoveredNotifyList' has different type in >> >'d:\work\github\tianocore\edk2\mdemodulepkg\core\dxeiplpeim\dxeload.c' >and >> >'d:\work\github\tianocore\edk2\sourceleveldebugpkg\library\debugagent\s >ecpeidebug >> agent\secpeidebugagentlib.c': 'struct (12 bytes)' and 'array (12 bytes)' >> > DxeIpl.lib(DxeLoad.obj) : error LNK2005: _mMemoryDiscoveredNotifyList >already >> defined in SecPeiDebugAgentLib.lib(SecPeiDebugAgentLib.obj) >> > >> >d:\work\github\tianocore\edk2\Build\OvmfIa32\DEBUG_VS2015x86\IA32\M >deModulePkg\Co >> re\DxeIplPeim\DxeIpl\DEBUG\DxeIpl.dll : fatal error LNK1169: one or more >multiply >> defined symbols found >> > >> > VS2015 OVMF X64 DEBUG without /WHOLEARCHIVE >> > =========================================== >> > FV Space Information >> > SECFV [22%Full] 212992 total, 48560 used, 164432 free >> > FVMAIN_COMPACT [33%Full] 3440640 total, 1147464 used, 2293176 free >> > DXEFV [39%Full] 10485760 total, 4163888 used, 6321872 free >> > PEIFV [22%Full] 917504 total, 204840 used, 712664 free >> > Total used = 5564752 >> > >> > >> > VS2015 OVMF X64 DEBUG with /WHOLEARCHIVE >> > =========================================== >> > FV Space Information >> > SECFV [23%Full] 212992 total, 50384 used, 162608 free >> > FVMAIN_COMPACT [33%Full] 3440640 total, 1147424 used, 2293216 free >> > DXEFV [42%Full] 10485760 total, 4422992 used, 6062768 free >> > PEIFV [27%Full] 917504 total, 255528 used, 661976 free >> > Total used = 5875338 >> > >> > Total used difference = 310586 bytes larger with /WHOLEARCHIVE >> > >> > For tool chains that do have size impacts, one option is to >> > have a "test" build that enables the linker flags to detect >> > duplicate symbols. For example the following could be added >> > to a DSC file. May want to disable GenFds stage when doing >> > this type of build. >> > >> > [BuildOptions] >> > !ifdef $(DETECT_DUPLICATE_SYMBOLS) >> > MSFT:*_VS2015_*_DLINK_FLAGS = /WHOLEARCHIVE >> > !endif >> >> Thank you (again) for the research! Looks like the gcc size impact is >> friendly enough to keep --whole-archive enabled at all times (possibly >> due to the --gc-sections flag mentioned by Ard, which we already have >> enabled). >> >> The VS2015 impact is really large however. >> >> I was hoping we could add these flags to >> "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template", regardless of platform DSC. (If the >> flag is non-default, and/or it's platform-dependent, then it will almost >> never be used, most likely.) But the VS2015 size increase really >> precludes /WHOLEARCHIVE (for the MSFT family) from >"tools_def.template". >> >> Would it be acceptable to add --whole-archive to "tools_def.template" >> only for GCC? After all, at the moment only XCODE*/XCLANG have "- >all_load". >> >> Thanks, >> Laszlo >> _______________________________________________ >> edk2-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel >_______________________________________________ >edk2-devel mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
