From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=192.55.52.115; helo=mga14.intel.com; envelope-from=dandan.bi@intel.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) (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 1A08822512140 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:34:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Apr 2018 00:34:30 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,300,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="221957558" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Apr 2018 00:34:30 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx122.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.37) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:34:29 -0700 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by fmsmsx122.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:34:29 -0700 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.79]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.6]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 15:34:27 +0800 From: "Bi, Dandan" To: Thomas Palmer , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" CC: "nickle.wang@hpe.com" , "Gao, Liming" , "Dong, Eric" , "Zeng, Star" , "Zhang, Chao B" Thread-Topic: [edk2] [PATCH 1/8] IntelFrameworkModulePkg/LegacyBootMaintUiLib: Update RouteConfig function Thread-Index: AQHT11RRCCQDZcvOC0eVX3O95wRwJaQJOBhQ Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 07:34:26 +0000 Message-ID: <3C0D5C461C9E904E8F62152F6274C0BB3BACB257@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1524083495-31936-1-git-send-email-thomas.palmer@hpe.com> In-Reply-To: <1524083495-31936-1-git-send-email-thomas.palmer@hpe.com> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] IntelFrameworkModulePkg/LegacyBootMaintUiLib: Update RouteConfig function X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2018 07:34:31 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for the updating. These changes make sense. Reviewed-by: Dandan Bi for this patch series. But the Spec seems not to be clear enough. When looking into details about the "progress" parameter in EFI HII Configu= ration Routing Protocol and EFI_HII_CONFIG_ACCESS_PROTOCOL. Description of "progress" parameter in ExtractConfig() in UEFI 2.7 Spec: Progress On return, points to a character in the Request string. Points to the strin= g's null terminator if request was successful. Points to the most recent '&= ' before the first failing name / value pair (or the beginning of the strin= g if the failure is in the first name / value pair) if the request was not = successful =09 EFI_NOT_FOUND A configuration element matching the routing data is not found. Progress se= t to the first character in the routing header. Description of "progress" parameter in RouteConfig () in UEFI 2.7 Spec: Progress a pointer to a string filled in with the offset of the most recent '&' befo= re the first failing name / value pair (or the beginning of the string if t= he failure is in the first name / value pair) or the terminating NULL if al= l was successful. EFI_NOT_FOUND Target for the specified routing data was not found. Compared with ExtractConfig(), the description of "Progress" parameter in R= outeConfig() is not very clear.=20 We think an ECR is nice to have to clarify them. What do you think? Thanks, Dandan -----Original Message----- From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Thom= as Palmer Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 4:32 AM To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org Cc: nickle.wang@hpe.com; Gao, Liming Subject: [edk2] [PATCH 1/8] IntelFrameworkModulePkg/LegacyBootMaintUiLib: U= pdate RouteConfig function According to UEFI spec, the RouteConfig protocol function should populate t= he Progress pointer with an address inside Configuration. This patch ensur= es that these functions are compliant when EFI_NOT_FOUND is returned. Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 Signed-off-by: Thomas Palmer --- .../Library/LegacyBootMaintUiLib/LegacyBootMaintUi.c | 3= +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/IntelFrameworkModulePkg/Library/LegacyBootMaintUiLib/LegacyBoo= tMaintUi.c b/IntelFrameworkModulePkg/Library/LegacyBootMaintUiLib/LegacyBoo= tMaintUi.c index a4828b7130c7..3092184ab760 100644 --- a/IntelFrameworkModulePkg/Library/LegacyBootMaintUiLib/LegacyBootMaintU= i.c +++ b/IntelFrameworkModulePkg/Library/LegacyBootMaintUiLib/LegacyBootMai +++ ntUi.c @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ Legacy Boot Maintainence UI implementation. =20 Copyright (c) 2004 - 2016, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
+(C) Copyright 2018 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
This program and the accompanying materials are licensed and made availab= le under the terms and conditions of the BSD License which accompanies thi= s distribution. The full text of the license may be found at @@ -563,6 +56= 4,8 @@ LegacyBootOptionRouteConfig ( return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER; } =20 + *Progress =3D Configuration; + // // Check routing data in . // Note: there is no name for Name/Value storage, only GUID will be chec= ked -- 2.7.4 _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel