From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <sigmaepsilon92@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ua0-x234.google.com (mail-ua0-x234.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::234])
 (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 D5B8C21A16EFB
 for <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x234.google.com with SMTP id j17so4862437uag.3
 for <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=XulOhtxsiblcc/I5O2fQtx+bz1W9uFghy45B82g6l+g=;
 b=AEKUQ2nir6p8UVPtSArSYBIhfvG/nL9K+7VMjOvY1Q08wlzeCWpIJuTkX8casqKSi4
 Dv1Lp7OzaRIsGWVOvXD1RFT2nzBDhOLX03WJvVBIw3OttO5GYpQhLadKnRgAqgUaHMGD
 WnkKxVTXEk5F+htGgfjgvgmkU7YB52qe/eNveTNCcsoHbCBZtL+h+VOfHV/vbYB5PuoF
 RhNXCIl3s2IkzxjBsqG7b8VI6o9hCNK92Hk+8s4eyXf+Ab7IvgOA3SfkEKuy8f4K8W53
 VlbHuh1S2k2yUCLOg0xzadxoqfm9OkIyRLSs7Rv5l8cUymhW4lh/CAWrIJ18ANeA0Kan
 fNuw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
 bh=XulOhtxsiblcc/I5O2fQtx+bz1W9uFghy45B82g6l+g=;
 b=SjPqgawjlmgm8Ls2zGmYPRraNCWDUoIrmvCNY41MaeK8ctokeEK6cL3VYfLNaP1Svq
 LevFCYlPrDFL/1IYH3uOOPf4LLJbXFNFxVP/SbTIEdbUofPjKrMA/BI4lb1cTXD2ZDWk
 sGLdneSQUUKRC3MTnDmxBhpi+c6YtHHJ+v2RVviHG0QI3uEO8xZ2gcRKJDxJr+MPLhoS
 ZnYBYq5bYXlGNJcpb+dka0O2CKnpPVcybj5BhPJn7k/Xjt3i6YIPXHrsJCb21EJtKQ3s
 94qfz1lapZEBH+kQSBCirwjTmsG/yZnkfoQFY1KANF7Rkk6qRkhU+v0QGnwgGW2B7ZyS
 MR2A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBOVAKgqNTF4ZS7cj9E4R09fJqP2mzA6z2IoPXbSyuktRa6RIHJ
 LXv9zFX8ZhDx1EUrgbsQ8YrdtkZbYw==
X-Received: by 10.176.0.226 with SMTP id 89mr1027669uaj.10.1495082589697; Wed,
 17 May 2017 21:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.31.94.206 with HTTP; Wed, 17 May 2017 21:43:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Michael Zimmermann <sigmaepsilon92@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 06:43:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAN9vWDJ0fSyyoP0yr1soq5SCSPZfx4yjHqnwyDTx=3HO7HccSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>, Star Zeng <star.zeng@intel.com>, 
 Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Subject: UEFI_DRIVER dependencies
X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: EDK II Development  <edk2-devel.lists.01.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/options/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
List-Help: <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel>,
 <mailto:edk2-devel-request@lists.01.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 04:43:11 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I know that UEFI_DRIVERs don't need or support Depex sections, but
what if an UEFI_DRIVER depends on a protocol provided by another
UEFI_DRIVER?
Since they get loaded automatically because I put them in my
platform's fdf, it raises the question of the loading order.

Will they get loaded in the order they're defined? How often will the
core retry if one of the drivers returns EFI_NOT_READY?

Thanks,
Michael