From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-x232.google.com (mail-wm0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 367AF81EE1 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:13:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x232.google.com with SMTP id t79so105865760wmt.0 for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:13:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akeo-ie.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3SoWx/Lbfh1FLZ77ndpl8zc9/ceSdD4Jr0Iqk1elk68=; b=STb8G9ctIPI+cxVAbz8F7UDw/Z/+8peZj8NfHE9l60XYfhBv0xrKrJO+pKnpZ8f7N1 zoRHSNs7Iy+g2u3LFJdcw1RmrO5D27aVs6OEn5FT3XXf+dv1iVJat5bq9cDUTL78e30Q O5Z27eTHKaEGV+vLphxVWIZK5iH66qaY0kQt5xJ4oFp2Ls3C2Avd7bP0adhGB3pPHXYz 9b8j4Cg7gU1A5o2khyIEVciPCON7cputRjVqBok5D/ITXioRfrxfr0zoyFC3yGMke2tD GqkTWf6l3YBuGwNhOz5pxtdugg74HFl+yk9OyFy0knsfe2YcMvHX+T4LALkJvQvkSTg8 NKDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3SoWx/Lbfh1FLZ77ndpl8zc9/ceSdD4Jr0Iqk1elk68=; b=RLfbPzFokNt5htpBUSYCEe4ZEb1GHDS5cbNmhWf/3Aej4zIWsZQ8fEvflyXpCSPp51 qHLdhWLe0DKADGexSTfEwH6qXoKJStiIPWFJazZtxD5L9Vgq07sIB/Ph+RQ99ei8De4M mZSXnBNfQKvs6SbCGbJi/NgNis2L1anWhnDfLvW2UFUpgrZFxtR3WkCAl5jVhGwab5JL fqINxOVIiJQh7vqSTN6n5Dn6eeQE8bPtRYqdFG2AMnJtte1d6v7ijxeL/WuRp7bnQBgs 663XoGqRQCH4LOgTE+hFIYzE4MAqQtUPCcZrizxEAfw5xBMSubtKSuEPFjM3PQ4Y3ppO KL+w== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvexUhJhsbHVj1rc08ltG/j5aMqMDZdejGbiFAGGi2Ar6ocDIw4YUwh16OHCpjiPQg== X-Received: by 10.28.147.81 with SMTP id v78mr34379288wmd.60.1478888036582; Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:13:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.0.101] ([84.203.32.71]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id c202sm29675865wme.1.2016.11.11.10.13.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 11 Nov 2016 10:13:55 -0800 (PST) To: "Kinney, Michael D" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" References: <22709fc2-7dec-f9eb-43f7-d06405349b7e@akeo.ie> From: Pete Batard Message-ID: <9bcd84c1-8fe6-f034-43dc-2c59929a371e@akeo.ie> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 18:13:54 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] MdeModulePkg/EbcDxe: add EBC Debugger X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 18:13:54 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Mike, On 2016.11.11 17:41, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > I see the new INF files uses '..' in the [Sources] > section, which is not allowed. Can we move that INF > file up one directory, so it can remove use of ..? Sure. I'll work on this and submit a V2. > I also see that this code defined its own > EFI_EBC_DEBUGGER_CODE macro. Could these be changed > to the standard DEBUG_CODE() macro that can be enabled > and disabled with a PCD? Or do you think we should add > a new Feature Flag PCD to enable/disable the EBC > debugger? I've been wondering about keeping the macro as well, which I mostly carried over from Tiano. If PCD is the more appropriate EDK2 practice, then I agree that we probably want to go with that. I do feel however that we would need a new feature flag, as some people may want to compile an EBC module with the current debug PCD functionality enabled, but without the EBC debugger, especially as, in essence, the EBC debugger is designed to be intrusive and will break the flow of regular EBC execution (such as on program entry or thunk calls). I'll explore this a little bit further, and try have a PCD proposal for V2. Regards, /Pete