From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 209.132.183.28, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by groups.io with SMTP; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 04:07:01 -0700 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EDDC2A09BF; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 11:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-120-154.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.120.154]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A09E119C69; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 11:06:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 27/35] SecurityPkg: stop abusing EFI_EVENT for protocol notify registration From: "Laszlo Ersek" To: Chao Zhang , Jian Wang , Jiewen Yao Cc: edk2-devel-groups-io Reply-To: devel@edk2.groups.io, lersek@redhat.com References: <20190917194935.24322-1-lersek@redhat.com> <20190917194935.24322-28-lersek@redhat.com> <9b7a8ba8-8e3c-0698-e12f-fff8fd010c8a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <0eb655b2-84b3-8ded-48c4-5065c2128cb9@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:06:58 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9b7a8ba8-8e3c-0698-e12f-fff8fd010c8a@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Thu, 03 Oct 2019 11:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Pinging SecurityPkg maintainers again, for reviewing this patch. Thanks Laszlo On 09/26/19 14:46, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > Chao, Jian, Jiewen, > > can you please review this patch? > > Thanks, > Laszlo > > > On 09/17/19 21:49, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> EfiCreateProtocolNotifyEvent() takes a (VOID**) for "Registration", >> similarly to gBS->RegisterProtocolNotify(). We should pass the address of >> an actual pointer-to-VOID, and not the address of an EFI_EVENT. EFI_EVENT >> just happens to be specified as (VOID*), and has nothing to do with the >> registration. >> >> This change is a no-op in practice; it's a semantic improvement. >> >> Cc: Chao Zhang >> Cc: Jian Wang >> Cc: Jiewen Yao >> Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek >> --- >> >> Notes: >> build-tested only >> >> SecurityPkg/HddPassword/HddPasswordDxe.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/SecurityPkg/HddPassword/HddPasswordDxe.c b/SecurityPkg/HddPassword/HddPasswordDxe.c >> index b0d795b6597f..051e64091d7f 100644 >> --- a/SecurityPkg/HddPassword/HddPasswordDxe.c >> +++ b/SecurityPkg/HddPassword/HddPasswordDxe.c >> @@ -2770,7 +2770,7 @@ HddPasswordDxeInit ( >> { >> EFI_STATUS Status; >> HDD_PASSWORD_DXE_PRIVATE_DATA *Private; >> - EFI_EVENT Registration; >> + VOID *Registration; >> EFI_EVENT EndOfDxeEvent; >> EDKII_VARIABLE_LOCK_PROTOCOL *VariableLock; >> >> > > > >