On 6/2/20 2:50 AM, Liming Gao via groups.io wrote:
Ard:
There is no objection to merge this change into the stable tag 202005. I see
this patch has Reviewed-by and Tested-by. Can you update this patch and merge
it today?
The stable tag will be created on 2020-06-03 (tomorrow).
Merged as #648
-----Original Message-----
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@arm.com>
Sent: 2020年5月22日 21:27
To: Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com>; Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com>
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; g...@suse.com; Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2] ArmPkg/CompilerIntrinsicsLib: provide
atomics intrinsics
On 5/22/20 12:54 PM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 22:22:58 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
On 05/21/20 16:16, Leif Lindholm wrote:
OK, then I would vote *for* merging the patch regardless. We know
how long some toolchain versions can stick around simply because
they were mentioned in some blog post somewhere that ended up high
in search rankings.
Once gcc 10.2 is released (and we have verified the problem can be
worked around elsewhere), I guess we could add a note saying "once
all gcc 10.0 and 10.1 toolchains are considered obsolete, this file
can be deleted".
I think we can expect all distros that ship gcc-10 to eventually
migrate to gcc-10.2+. Until then, this patch should hopefully work.
(I'm quite annoyed by having to call the patch "temporary", as it
feels very technically impressive.)
So I think I agree with Leif, with a small modification to the idea:
rather than a *note* saying "back this out once 10.0 and 10.1 have
been replaced by 10.2+ in all 'large' distros"
That isn't actually exatly what I meant - I meant properly obsolete as
in "we are now reasonably certain no one is still using some silly
ancient cross compiler they checked into their build infrastructure
years ago".
, I would suggest filing a *BZ*
for the same. And I recommend making the new BZ dependent on
TianoCore#2723 (i.e. the present BZ).
But I don't object to that approach.
OK, so i will leave it up to Liming and the stewards to decide whether this
gets incorporated ino the stable tag or not. If it is, I would like to fold in
the fixup below
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/CompilerIntrinsicsLib/AArch64/Atomics.S
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/CompilerIntrinsicsLib/AArch64/Atomics.S
@@ -53,10 +53,10 @@
0: ld\a\()xr\s r0_\sz, [x1]
.ifnc \insn, swp
\opc tmp1_\sz, r0_\sz, tmp0_\sz
+ st\l\()xr\s w15, tmp1_\sz, [x1]
.else
- \opc tmp1_\sz, tmp0_\sz
+ st\l\()xr\s w15, tmp0_\sz, [x1]
.endif
- st\l\()xr\s w15, tmp1_\sz, [x1]
cbnz w15, 0b
ret
fn_end __aarch64_\insn\()\sz\()\model
to get rid of the redundant 'mov' for the SWP flavor of the atomics helpers.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#60562): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/60562
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/74347980/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
