[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] x86/ACPI: Fix build error when tboot is disabled
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Costin Lupu <costin.lupu@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:51:48 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=citrix.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=citrix.com; dkim=pass header.d=citrix.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=J0rkSehxRnaP5OEe+FeL+nBVXIlDkDepSVoh1kZEQLU=; b=UL927m5XzQBXzBQ3ZLGw+TgbfbYFtlwQkNwSIKxsDgd/U/NLNOTt8sixTGAnNFIhfD6NwlTplyvzBVoVuJm6az8tgGb0olo0TOdLQApy+w8BsQLyI8T0MCVfnMDqmy7XNUXjGmZVP+wubtrmZuZyJB19x4wKYFsopweM8myTfdLxrO0HtbeQqRqEaOmlgWmldpA+Xym91QT3LlNC9CogLUbU8V2rfoA/NHAhv8db+Sg5id2A/JstrQRmTNBGRvdzwZkuGuVmE5kur/vDVJjjRYRw/CeDCZsJxd1BrUDsUCpedMKmxjijtVmtSuDPHaDZ1jQSbBE4Rx3LEOnDF4siJg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Yf3TYGEqcf6QQCGuNB7jh67v1z/hF68b5DzJ74RMW7/SESlqwjjKZ6E3DfP0qL82quOXrmbIQ/CvfE0aZ+G16M7uJY00FafAWzN/EkVW/gX8knbDFHM2/Sgl9fCtv7AfLn6N4euAlf9RtLiw6tQKKIVE+3gkuJh3NbTX3qBaUgZqjNH950OSmcY5jeG6KN0vuB8nr/Z2E2eSHtRO3Sa17tb/Un39uKBcB3iYdmb0d6vhPdF/2+nzh+K1tpt/Faw2r107kdTPBw6RR0OSi6gJnt07Zvwhz6mK77BJhvuEuWx3WhFvZ2Q6O99Cqf++nCu+JYIg9MQy73+4aklobMz/ww==
- Authentication-results: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=pass (signature verified) header.i=@citrix.onmicrosoft.com
- Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 13:52:02 +0000
- Ironport-hdrordr: A9a23:QChOFa4xqpb4QliKKAPXwT2CI+orLtY04lQ7vn1ZYRZeftWE0+ Wnm/oG3RH54QxhIE0Is9aGJaWGXDf4/Zl6/YEeMd6ZLXLbkUGvK5xv6pan/i34F0TFh5Bg/I ppbqQWMqyVMXFUlsD/iTPXL/8Bx529/LmslaPiyR5WPHhXQoVByys8NQqBCE1xQ2B9dOsEPb 6R/NBOqTblWVl/VLXdOlA/U+LOp8LGmfvdCHZta3EawTKDgj+y5LnxHwLw5GZ5bxp03bwg/W LZ+jaY2oyfsuq2whKZ92jf44U+oqqF9vJ/BdeBgsVQFzP0igzAXvUDZ5S+ulkOwd2H2RIDqv eJjhsqI8o2y165RAqIiCqo8zPPlBA063Gn80OSghLY0K7EbQN/IMJbnopSbhbQr2Eages56r 9Cwn6C3qAneS/orWDX78PSXxt3m0Lxi3wkluIYkhVkIPsjQY4UhoQF50teDJoJWA784ps2Cf RjAajnlYRrWGLfRHjDpWFk3NGlGlg1ARuCRFEP/uOP1Tw+ph1E5npd78QFhX8L6J80D6NP7+ OBFr5n0ItPXcN+V9MKOM4xBeC+EXfESw7AOCapOFziUJoKInTXtvfMkf4IzdDvU5QS15M5hJ nIFGlAvWp3QUjpEsHm5uwDzjn9BE60Ri/kwN1S79xCo7X5AID3OTCeUjkV4oOdisRaKcXBQP 64JJ9fR8X/JXDyXbtI2wGWYeggFVAuFOYcoc0yUU6Cqob2EaiCjJ2vTN/jYJ7WVRctQCfWH2 YKVjmbHrQ70mmbHlvDxCX3d1yoUErl5p50GLXd5IEoufUwH7wJjQgPlU783MuCLjpPv8UNDT xDCaKilrn+qXi9/G7O4WksJwFUCVxN5q78F3xQowsHNF71bKYDt92TdXs65gr6GjZvC8XMEA BeoFxr+aW4a5yIrBpSdO6aDg==
- Ironport-sdr: /RnKoD8LpbVW7jBNZMw1h2g3o9mumYRsDm219nAXpSg+PkgEYL9nR0VeFYwZyNTgRcglOHRwTf Uf1JYAeWNRVGFWadVxZsWrHRACNTgEftUYTxB7txAOimpRyKpFiZueJazuavIkBDjZ25hPzL8W bICBHvgBw3bVjIs69k/FGGI8vNpySVwAvai6Y8YaEl8EOw1J68s7qBx5DyLQDn6Fxj//nen6mf vVaPkr7WSdtQuBZt+qUqG26zFJ+OxOh4FNTQwTJI8Tg+ZgzswzyWqnhCJl9AEn57gHvLHd9Yw0 z3Y=
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 29/04/2021 14:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 29.04.2021 15:22, Costin Lupu wrote:
>> On 4/29/21 3:40 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> If there is a specific case where the compiler fails to DCE the
>>> offending code, then you need to describe this in sufficient
>>> detail.
>> Yes, indeed. My bad, it is for a debug build with -O0, so without DCE.
> Iirc there's a series pending to switch to -Og; I don't think we
> build with -O0 under any circumstances (for this very reason).
-Og is roughly about -O0.9. There is certainly some trivial DCE
involved, but no optimisations which radically rearrange the code
structure. The -Og series did survive some randconfig testing, but I
can't guarantee that it was comprehensive.
As for -O0, I think causality is the other way around there. Wei
elected to rely on DCE for conditional compilation because we didn't
seem to care about compiling at -O0.
Part of me thinks that we ought to cope compiling at any optimisation
level, including -O0, but I doubt I'd like the extra ifdef-ary required
to make that work.
I think we absolutely should have Kconfig to select between -Og/1/2/3,
as well as binutils new microarch levels
~Andrew
|
