From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) (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 19F4120945B7F for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Sep 2017 16:38:50 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,399,1500966000"; d="scan'208,217";a="900754253" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Sep 2017 16:38:50 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx155.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.71) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:38:49 -0700 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by FMSMSX155.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.319.2; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:38:49 -0700 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.175]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.93]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Sat, 16 Sep 2017 07:38:47 +0800 From: "Yao, Jiewen" To: Laszlo Ersek , "Ni, Ruiyu" , "Paulo Alcantara" CC: "Wu, Hao A" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Zeng, Star" Thread-Topic: [edk2] Functionality issues in UDF support Thread-Index: AQHTLfGsbqtLEEo+YUKCCcB2+Y9nrKK1BMMAgAAEkYCAAImeAIAACiAAgAADf4CAAAMqAIAA9xzg Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 23:38:47 +0000 Message-ID: <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503A9BC398@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BA4206B@SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com> <081B7D33-9F33-40CE-B569-62CC8C204B56@zytor.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BA420DF@SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BA4212E@SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1C01A5C1-09DE-4747-BA65-4EB668D76094@zytor.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BA42270@SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BA42713@SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com> <508e1df7-fe00-126b-d583-c81db8514e10@redhat.com> <11481899-6F36-4877-B4FF-732B2781F3CB@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.0.116 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.22 Subject: Re: Functionality issues in UDF support X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 23:35:50 -0000 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Laszlo and Ruiyu I can think 1 possible alternative, for your consideration only. 1) Move the feature to OvmfPkg. As such, it won't block us at this moment. Once the UDF solution has good quality, we can move it back to MdeModulePkg= . Thank you Yao Jiewen From: Laszlo Ersek [mailto:lersek@redhat.com] Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 12:51 AM To: Ni, Ruiyu ; Paulo Alcantara Cc: Yao, Jiewen ; Wu, Hao A ; edk= 2-devel@lists.01.org; Zeng, Star Subject: Re: [edk2] Functionality issues in UDF support On 09/15/17 18:40, Ni, Ruiyu wrote: > Laszlo, > Please do not add a PCD for this. Too many PCDs are no good to the projec= t. I understand that new MdeModulePkg PCDs are not liked, but what do you propose instead? If we simply revert the PartitionDxe changes, then people that want to experiment with general UDF support under OVMF won't be able to do that at all. I'm in the process of adding -D UDF_ENABLE to OvmfPkg, ArmVirtPkg, and Nt32Pkg, which would control both the FeaturePCD and the inclusion of UdfDxe in the build. If you disagree with the FeaturePCD, I can stop working on this, but I don't know what the alternative is. "Fix it immediately" is not an alternative; we can't do that. If you want to revert the change, it's your prerogative, but that will prevent everybody from testing gradual UDF improvements. (No 3rd parties build OVMF from any staging branches, so if the feature is only available on a staging branch, it might as well not exist, for the outside world.) Thanks Laszlo