From: Nikita Leshenko <nikita.leshchenko@oracle.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>,
edk2-devel@lists.01.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
Subject: Re: PciBusDxe: PCI-Express bug with dynamic PcdPciExpressBaseAddress
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 14:28:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53BCBC79-3D87-4D47-9543-364D3A576A66@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b44d624d-f966-0de8-6501-db20cdea75e1@redhat.com>
> On 13 Sep 2018, at 15:15, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/13/18 14:27, Nikita Leshenko wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed explanation. I guess we have no choice
>> but to copy BaseCachingPciExpressLib (renamed to
>> DxePciExpressLibCaching) from ArmVirt to OVMF as well.
>
> Uhh, hold on for a minute :) , "no choice but" is a bit of a stretch.
> Where does OVMF enter the picture to begin with?
>
> Between OvmfPkg and ArmVirtPkg, we have a sort-of rule that ArmVirtPkg
> is allowed to consume OvmfPkg content, but not vice versa. So, we could
> move (and rename) the lib instance from ArmVirtPkg to OvmfPkg, update
> the reference(s) in ArmVirtPkg accordingly, and then consume the lib
> instance in OvmfPkg as well... *if* there was any reason to consume the
> lib instance in OvmfPkg in the first place.
>
> (Of course if, by "we", you meant an internal Oracle use case, then I'm
> not trying to pry. I took "we" as "upstream community". Emails are
> ambiguous! :) )
Yes, I originally meant in upstream community. But I agree with your
comments below, so yes we definitely have a choice :)
>
> I suggest that you please file a bug for MdeModulePkg /
> BasePciExpressLib in the TianoCore Bugzilla, referencing this discussion from the
> mailing list archive
Sure, I filed the bug at
https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178
-Nikita
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.01.org_pipermail_edk2-2Ddevel_2018-2DSeptember_029427.html&d=DwICaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=JD7W0KpKqI3xo5AglC-aIVDRz_ysy5CrQRnZ9Jb7je0&m=kTbOaTuIdbwwl68uu5hSfrQkVeQGmOgSZZgr8guTIAc&s=dBONCYfrLeiUrFWuFes0jATimnx7m278xMXfzfQauqA&e=>,
> and request that (a) either the dynamic PCD use case be fixed, or (b)
> the code own up to the restriction and be explicit about FixedPCD, both
> in the INF file(s) and the C-language APIs.
>
> Thanks!
> Laszlo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-16 12:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-06 19:08 PciBusDxe: PCI-Express bug with dynamic PcdPciExpressBaseAddress Nikita Leshenko
2018-09-07 0:25 ` Ni, Ruiyu
2018-09-07 8:44 ` Laszlo Ersek
2018-09-07 17:01 ` Liran Alon
2018-09-11 13:34 ` Laszlo Ersek
2018-09-13 12:27 ` Nikita Leshenko
2018-09-13 13:15 ` Laszlo Ersek
2018-09-16 12:28 ` Nikita Leshenko [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53BCBC79-3D87-4D47-9543-364D3A576A66@oracle.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox