Laszlo: Thanks for comments. I submit two bugs. One is for UefiCpuPkg, another is for BaseTools.
https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=849 https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=850 > -----Original Message----- > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Laszlo > Ersek > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 6:03 PM > To: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com> > Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2] [Patch 0/7] EDK2: Enable XCODE5 tool chain with NASM > source > > On 01/11/18 10:54, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > Liming, > > > > On 01/10/18 16:24, Liming Gao wrote: > >> 1. Use nasm source file for X86 tool chain, then ASM and S file can be > >> removed. > >> 2. Update Nasm source file to resolve the absolute addressing. > >> 3. Verify OVMF IA32, IA32X64 and X64 boot to shell functionality with > >> XCODE5 > >> Here is build command. > >> build -p OvmfPkg\OvmfPkgIa32X64.dsc -a IA32 -a X64 -DSMM_REQUIRE=TRUE > >> -DSECURE_BOOT_ENABLE=TRUE -DUSE_OLD_SHELL > >> build -p OvmfPkg\OvmfPkgIa32.dsc -a IA32 -a X64 -DSMM_REQUIRE=TRUE > >> -DSECURE_BOOT_ENABLE=TRUE -DUSE_OLD_SHELL > >> build -p OvmfPkg\OvmfPkgX64.dsc -a IA32 -a X64 -DSMM_REQUIRE=TRUE > >> -DSECURE_BOOT_ENABLE=TRUE -DUSE_OLD_SHELL > >> 4. Known limitation is XCODE5 doesn't support HII resource section > >> generation. > >> So, new UEFI shell application tftp can't be used. Old shell is used. > > > > After sleeping on this, I got a question: is there a public bug report > > in the clang / llvm bug tracker about this shortcoming? It would be nice > > to reference it in the commit messages. > > > > The main reason I'm asking this is because these workarounds include > > more and more DB / DW / DD / DQ mnemonics in the NASM source files. One > > of the original promises of NASM was that we could cut down on the > > binary representation of x86 instructions, just write real assembly > > code. This was in part enabled by NASM supporting multi-mode assembly > > files, such that mode transitions (e.g. from real mode to protected mode > > to long mode) could still be implemented in a human-readable assembly file. > > > > So this workaround is a step back in that regard (i.e., for readability > > and future updates). I agree we are sometimes forced to do such things > > to support all the toolchains we target, but it would be nice to have > > proof that the clang / llvm developers *intend* to fix this (possibly in > > the next major release of XCODE -- I'm not sure). So a public bug report > > that we could reference in the commit messages would be great. > > Nevermind, I just read Mike's comments and the new approach; it's much > better! > > (Still, if we have an XCODE bug report, it would be nice to reference > that in the commit messages.) > > Thanks! > Laszlo > _______________________________________________ > edk2-devel mailing list > edk2-devel@lists.01.org > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
