Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix typos in MdePkg and SecurityPkg

[Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 12/17/18 11:08, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 12/11/18 2:31 AM, Shenglei Zhang wrote:
>> Change EFI_RETURNING_FROM_EFI_APPLICATOIN to
>> EFI_RETURNING_FROM_EFI_APPLICATION.
>>
>> Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
>> Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
>> Cc: Chao Zhang <chao.b.zhang@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
>> Shenglei Zhang (2):
>>   MdePkg/IndustryStandard: Fix a typo in UefiTcgPlatform.h
>>   SecurityPkg/Tcg: Fix typos in TcgDxe.c and Tcg2Dxe.c
>>
>>  MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/UefiTcgPlatform.h | 2 +-
>>  SecurityPkg/Tcg/Tcg2Dxe/Tcg2Dxe.c                 | 4 ++--
>>  SecurityPkg/Tcg/TcgDxe/TcgDxe.c                   | 4 ++--
>>  3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> NACK, this change has to be in the same patch to be bisectable.
> 
> However, if you resend the same change squashed in a single patch, you
> can directly add my:
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>

Good catch! Bisectability is important!

An alternative approach to yours could be: first, introduce the
correctly spelled macro (with the same value); second, update the
references; third, remove the misspelled macro. This would be *slightly*
more idiomatic for edk2, where we tend to avoid cross-package patches,
if we can.

Personally I'd be fine with either approach in this case.

Thanks!
Laszlo