From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4396621A04823 for ; Mon, 1 May 2017 16:38:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 May 2017 16:38:43 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,402,1488873600"; d="scan'208";a="94373555" Received: from rfrapple-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.255.75.93]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 May 2017 16:38:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Laszlo Ersek , edk2-devel-01 Message-ID: <149368192252.29568.13017173745830665833@jljusten-skl> From: Jordan Justen In-Reply-To: <62f44903-c06a-fb0f-0761-17cf9107620e@redhat.com> Cc: Gary Ching-Pang Lin References: <20170429201500.18496-1-lersek@redhat.com> <20170429201500.18496-3-lersek@redhat.com> <149351328512.20670.1563878734495138189@jljusten-skl> <030f8312-35ce-5c86-205c-2ee6c0b5ab8b@redhat.com> <149358697668.23065.6363402854761002239@jljusten-skl> <149365940885.25909.1007719045522991203@jljusten-skl> <88d156c9-c18e-c4e8-b9a3-641a1b6b4102@redhat.com> <149366640991.26266.1222435765632598609@jljusten-skl> <62f44903-c06a-fb0f-0761-17cf9107620e@redhat.com> User-Agent: alot/0.5.1 Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 16:38:42 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] OvmfPkg: introduce FD_SIZE_4MB (mainly) for Windows HCK X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 May 2017 23:38:44 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-05-01 16:07:48, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 05/01/17 21:20, Jordan Justen wrote: > > = > > At this I'd just like figure out what to do about the 4MB layout, so > > can we stop getting worked up over this side show? > = > Thanks for calling it a side show, real friendly. Ok, I apologize. The 'side show' comment applies equally to me. Can we please just move on? We obviously disagree how to determine how full 2MB is, but it doesn't much matter since you'll soon be abandoning it entirely. We have too much room in the 4MB fridge to be concerned about this. > The only email (that I can see) in this thread that I haven't reacted to = is: > = > http://mid.mail-archive.com/149365894632.25909.11739243410891079091@jljus= ten-skl > = > where you wrote "I'd rather go with 128k, and I'd also rather stay with > 2MB". You dropped my ":)" :) Ok, me adding that was a poor choice, despite including a smiley. I meant to convey was: "Ok, fine, let's figure out the 4MB layout, but I still want to whine about it a little more." -Jordan