From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=141.146.126.78; helo=aserp2120.oracle.com; envelope-from=nikita.leshchenko@oracle.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com (aserp2120.oracle.com [141.146.126.78]) (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 A83E521962301 for ; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 05:28:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w8GCOPVT024481; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 12:28:19 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=content-type : mime-version : subject : from : in-reply-to : date : cc : content-transfer-encoding : message-id : references : to; s=corp-2018-07-02; bh=b97KQFOiV3u2YDSy+PTCDZx2HitVDmN7dfzcLvq6Be4=; b=nYlNrfYuwDhFd1oOdym6x/yVHz6msEYIRcyG2Zc4tGL4uKSB54HwFDWSyTqTI44TeuNp TrdyMiXKU99m7czPRS0FRCtnGgBQ6Z5qgW9TlonjoJkDFcpAtOZ3O42kOfsJosisOGQ+ c9kl5hUMhDS7lznfv4cUAZ3sm20Ijk7isiwK4sqEusZrARc+nz8ZWtnbUYNqy9g1Ws4x zFf/Ob1imxVPQ7IIUnpXdxNU4B/M7IlcMcCPV2ajxIQCquuHx2nZrKQdi4E50pDkLE3l NIGItSF047gmB7JiWbNW7Irb/1u26tCYSA59ZwV8uQ6X38G5HqhAhvqbB2+/sPeCdD7L DA== Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2mgt1pamh0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 16 Sep 2018 12:28:19 +0000 Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w8GCSDLe030005 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 16 Sep 2018 12:28:13 GMT Received: from abhmp0017.oracle.com (abhmp0017.oracle.com [141.146.116.23]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w8GCSC7b026654; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 12:28:12 GMT Received: from [10.30.3.6] (/213.57.127.2) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sun, 16 Sep 2018 05:28:12 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Nikita Leshenko In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 14:28:07 +0200 Cc: Liran Alon , edk2-devel@lists.01.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org Message-Id: <53BCBC79-3D87-4D47-9543-364D3A576A66@oracle.com> References: <2fdb6059-86a4-a8d5-a46c-286c62e17864@redhat.com> <8A63AC46-22FF-480A-A109-9902B7076464@oracle.com> To: Laszlo Ersek X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=9017 signatures=668708 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1807170000 definitions=main-1809160137 Subject: Re: PciBusDxe: PCI-Express bug with dynamic PcdPciExpressBaseAddress X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2018 12:28:21 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On 13 Sep 2018, at 15:15, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >=20 > On 09/13/18 14:27, Nikita Leshenko wrote: >>=20 >> Thanks for the detailed explanation. I guess we have no choice >> but to copy BaseCachingPciExpressLib (renamed to >> DxePciExpressLibCaching) from ArmVirt to OVMF as well. >=20 > Uhh, hold on for a minute :) , "no choice but" is a bit of a stretch. > Where does OVMF enter the picture to begin with? >=20 > 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. >=20 > (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 :) >=20 > 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=3D1178 -Nikita > = , > 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. >=20 > Thanks! > Laszlo