From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.1893.1589358081808181000 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 01:21:21 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: intel.com, ip: 192.55.52.151, mailfrom: ray.ni@intel.com) IronPort-SDR: /Te6Q26w/zKy07F1s91vWBFTnIQ3aP9+k/DjCNz2G77Ktv+hAE2TqC07gZqd7Jc4kEhU+x/aBn JAJjwTJcd4Eg== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 May 2020 01:21:20 -0700 IronPort-SDR: FpKwYI3c41PR+3nWmBsoi/fAcwGCGgW344l/hdadm6WAONVGGTB+DfgkwkmIpjGBrXnZlsqB5+ MM8PjvV8aE/w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,387,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="306722156" Received: from fmsmsx103.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.201]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2020 01:21:20 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx152.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.5) by FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Wed, 13 May 2020 01:21:20 -0700 Received: from shsmsx108.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.97) by FMSMSX152.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.125.5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Wed, 13 May 2020 01:21:20 -0700 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.210]) by SHSMSX108.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.8.95]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 13 May 2020 16:21:17 +0800 From: "Ni, Ray" To: "Javeed, Ashraf" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" CC: "Kinney, Michael D" , "Gao, Liming" Subject: Re: [edk2-staging/UEFI_PCI_ENHANCE-2 PATCH 01/15] MdePkg/Protocols: Deprecated the EFI encoded macros Thread-Topic: [edk2-staging/UEFI_PCI_ENHANCE-2 PATCH 01/15] MdePkg/Protocols: Deprecated the EFI encoded macros Thread-Index: AQHWJuYUJe62JSGvi0ytnelqFKTApKig+BwAgASX6UA= Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 08:21:16 +0000 Message-ID: <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5C53B130@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <20200510161412.13832-1-ashraf.javeed@intel.com> <20200510161412.13832-2-ashraf.javeed@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20200510161412.13832-2-ashraf.javeed@intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.2.0.6 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Return-Path: ray.ni@intel.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > + // The device policy AUTO or NOT_APPLICABLE shall be treated as "do no= t touch". > + // The device policy from platform can be different for the RP and its= EP device; > + // however if the device capability does not match with the policy tha= n it shall > + // be ignored. For example; if the policy for EP is to set the 10b Ext= ended Tag > + // than EP device capability as a requester and its RP completer capab= ility is > + // checked. If platform ask policy change only for RP than its device = capability > + // is checked to enable the 10b Extended Tag. > + // > + UINT8 ExtendedTag; I am not sure of the comments for ExtendedTag right now. Let's discuss on the ExtendedTag implementation patch. >=20 >=20 > + // The device policy AUTO or NOT_APPLICABLE provided to EP shall be tr= eated as > + // mo LTR programming from the path of EP to parent RP. If same is pro= vided for "mo LTR programming". Is "mo" "no"?