Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] ArmPkg: implement EFI_MP_SERVICES_PROTOCOL based on PSCI calls

["Michael Kubacki" <mikuback@linux.microsoft.com>]

Maintainers have two options for Spell Check as described in the Spell 
Check CI Plugin readme - 
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/tree/master/.pytool/Plugin/SpellCheck

1. Set AuditOnly to "true" - Disables all spelling errors in the package 
from the failing the build entirely.

2. Extend the dictionary - Add specific words that are allowed. Many 
packages already do this.

3. IgnoreStandardPaths - Do not check files by path pattern.

As a maintainer, you can either opt out of Spell Check from the failing 
the build entirely by enabling AuditOnly or choose a different level of 
granularity by simply updating your package CI YAML file.

On 9/7/2022 3:35 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sept 2022 at 06:35, Rebecca Cran <quic_rcran@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> Also, CI is failing in the SpellCheck test because of the
>> "-mstrict-align" in
>> ArmPsciMpServicesDxe.inf.
>>
>> /home/vsts/work/1/s/ArmPkg/Drivers/ArmPsciMpServicesDxe/ArmPsciMpServicesDxe.inf:55:25
>> - Unknown word (mstrict)
>>
>> Should I add "mstrict" to pytool/Plugin/SpellCheck/cspell.base.yaml ?
>>
> 
> This is getting ridiculous.
> 
> I'm all for code quality and automation, but if t we cannot use
> compiler command line options that it supported since the dawn of time
> without bending over backwards to placate the CI machine, we are
> throwing out the baby with the bath water.
> 
> At the very least, maintainers should be able to override the CI - I
> spent 2 hours yesterday preparing a submission that ultimately got
> rejected because MPIDR is not in the permitted word list (suggestion:
> use 'mpidr')
> 
> In the Linux kernel, we have patch check and sparse (which is somewhat
> similar to ECC in a sense). Some maintainers run it, some don't, but
> in the end, the discretion lies with the person not the machine. This
> is the only way that makes sense.
> 
> As the co-maintainer of ArmPkg, ArmVirtPkg, ArmPlatformPkg, OvmfPkg
> and EmbeddedPkg, I hereby request that the Ci restrictions are either
> lifted entirely for these packages, or relaxed so that a PR can be
> merged at my discretion, even if the CI thinks there are unresolved
> issues.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 9/6/22 22:25, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>>> On 9/6/22 22:03, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/ArmPkg/ArmPkg.dsc b/ArmPkg/ArmPkg.dsc
>>>> index 59fd8f295d4f..4716789402fc 100644
>>>> --- a/ArmPkg/ArmPkg.dsc
>>>> +++ b/ArmPkg/ArmPkg.dsc
>>>> @@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ [Components.common]
>>>>      ArmPkg/Drivers/CpuPei/CpuPei.inf
>>>>      ArmPkg/Drivers/ArmGic/ArmGicDxe.inf
>>>>      ArmPkg/Drivers/ArmGic/ArmGicLib.inf
>>>> +  ArmPkg/Drivers/ArmPsciMpServicesDxe/ArmPsciMpServicesDxe.inf
>>>>      ArmPkg/Drivers/GenericWatchdogDxe/GenericWatchdogDxe.inf
>>>>      ArmPkg/Drivers/TimerDxe/TimerDxe.inf
>>> This won't work, since there's no support for 32-bit ARM code.
>>> I'll move it into the AARCH64 section.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>