On 07/23/15 12:31, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 07/23/15 01:06, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> Well, why don't we just add -mabi=ms to the compiler flags? Then EFIAPI >> in the source code could be a no-op, right? > > Yes, I think EFIAPI would be a no-op then. I don't know why we don't set > -mabi=ms globally. > > Hm, wait, I do know. Because gcc-4.4 doesn't support it. See the docs: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.4.7/gcc/i386-and-x86_002d64-Options.html > > The section "Intel 386 and AMD x86-64 Options" does not list "-mabi=". > Apparently, the "-mabi=(ms|sysv)" option was introduced in gcc-4.5. > > ... Hm, that might be a glitch in the gcc-4.4 documentation. I just > checked my Fedora 13 VM (with gcc-4.4), and it does know about -mabi=ms. > So, I don't know. Sigh. My test was wrong. This is what I checked: [root@edk2-gcc44-fc13 ~]# gcc -mabi=ms gcc: no input files That's a good result, right? Nope. Compare: [root@edk2-gcc44-fc13 ~]# gcc -mabi=foobar gcc: no input files As I said, "sigh". The diagnostic output cannot be trusted here; the results are undistinguishable between "ms" and "foobar". Compare on gcc-4.8: $ gcc -mabi=ms gcc: fatal error: no input files $ gcc -mabi=foobar gcc: error: unrecognized argument in option '-mabi=foobar' gcc: note: valid arguments to '-mabi=' are: ms sysv So, the documentation of gcc-4.4 is apparently correct, and -mabi is a silently ignored switch. Thanks Laszlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
