Jordan Justen [mailto:jordan.l.jus...@intel.com] wrote:
]On 2014-11-07 08:16:23, Scott Duplichan wrote: ]> These are all good answers. I can't come up with a strong argument for the ]> mixed sysv/ms ABI. Maybe the next step is to test -mabi=ms using several gcc ]> versions (I think -mabi=ms was introduced with gcc 4.5). If that works, I could ]> submit a patch and see what happens.. ] ]I mentioned a reason in this thread a few days back. But, we should ]look into -mabi=ms for RELEASE builds. ] ]-Jordan I agree, the approach in your previous email is a good one. Prototyping asm functions to enforce calling convention is always a good idea. In theory an IA32 build could be done with a Microsoft compiler with option /Gr (__fastcall calling convention) and it would work. This would not be possible if asm function calling convention information were missing. If I make this patch, I will add the gcc -mabi=ms to the release build. Now for rants... 1) Why do so many developers never want to test release builds? To me, code is not clean until both debug and release builds work smoothly. 2) Why is the NOOPT build missing from virtually every DSC file in EDK2? The EDK NOOPT build is most like what developers call a DEBUG build. It is the only one setup for source level debugging, at least for Microsoft tool chains. The Duet DSC files are missing both RELEASE and NOOPT options. I may submit a patch to allow all 3 builds to every DSC file. Thanks, Scott ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
