On Thu, 2015-07-23 at 12:04 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39472#c8 suggests that the > > support was backported to GCC 4.4 too. > > "ix86/gcc-4_4-branch" sounds like an internal branch for use by Intel > engineers. Features are not backported to stable branches.
Hm, yes. I was misled by that final comment. It doesn't seem to be in gcc-4_4-branch; you're right. I don't suppose we can ditch GCC 4.4 support too? I hesitate slightly because *last* time I said 'here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better compiler' I then ended up spending a month or so hacking LLVM to add .code16 support... :) > > If we *can't* kill EFIAPI completely, then we need to get GCC's > > __builtin_va_list to do the right thing according to the ABI of the > > function it happens to be compiling at the time. This is > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50818 > > Am I CCed because you'd like me to fix it? :) I can take a look. You were Cc'd because I just revived an old thread and you were already on it. But don't let me discourage you! My *primary* motivation right now is getting our OpenSSL patches upstream though, and fixing PR50818 doesn't really help with that in the short term. But it *would* be nice. -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
