On 07/13/20 11:27, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > Hi Abner, > > just noticed the following difference in this patch (now commit > 9025a014f9d9a): > > On 03/06/20 06:36, Abner Chang wrote: > >> diff --git a/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLib.inf >> b/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLib.inf >> index 3fa52f5543..01ee665183 100644 >> --- a/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLib.inf >> +++ b/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLib.inf >> @@ -661,6 +662,7 @@ >> GCC:*_*_X64_CC_FLAGS = -U_WIN32 -U_WIN64 $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-error=format -Wno-format >> -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable -DNO_MSABI_VA_FUNCS >> GCC:*_*_ARM_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> GCC:*_*_AARCH64_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-format -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> + GCC:*_*_RISCV64_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) -Wno-error=format >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-format -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> GCC:*_CLANG35_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> GCC:*_CLANG38_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> GCC:*_CLANGPDB_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> -Wno-error=incompatible-pointer-types -Wno-error=pointer-sign >> -Wno-error=implicit-function-declaration -Wno-error=ignored-pragma-optimize > > vs. > >> diff --git a/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLibCrypto.inf >> b/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLibCrypto.inf >> index f1f9fbb938..5c2206f6fb 100644 >> --- a/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLibCrypto.inf >> +++ b/CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/OpensslLibCrypto.inf >> @@ -610,6 +611,7 @@ >> GCC:*_*_X64_CC_FLAGS = -U_WIN32 -U_WIN64 $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-error=format -Wno-format >> -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable -DNO_MSABI_VA_FUNCS >> GCC:*_*_ARM_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> GCC:*_*_AARCH64_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-format -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> + GCC:*_*_RISCV64_CC_FLAGS = $(OPENSSL_FLAGS) >> -Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized -Wno-format -Wno-error=unused-but-set-variable >> GCC:*_CLANG35_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> GCC:*_CLANG38_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> GCC:*_CLANGPDB_*_CC_FLAGS = -std=c99 -Wno-error=uninitialized >> -Wno-error=incompatible-pointer-types -Wno-error=pointer-sign >> -Wno-error=implicit-function-declaration -Wno-error=ignored-pragma-optimize > > Why do RISCV64_CC_FLAGS differ between "OpensslLib.inf" and > "OpensslLibCrypto.inf"? > > The former has "-Wno-error=format" additionally. I think we should > either remove it, or else add it to "OpensslLibCrypto.inf" as well. > > These INF files should be easily diffable against each other. The only > differences should be (a) in the generated file list (the > "OpensslLib.inf" file should list a bunch of "ssl/..." pathnames, while > the other INF file should list none), and (b) in the BASE_NAME / > MODULE_UNI_FILE / FILE_GUID defines. > > If you agree, can you please submit a patch, for eliminating the > difference in RISCV64_CC_FLAGS?
I've filed <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2848> about this. Thanks Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#62450): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/62450 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/71767313/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
