From: "Carsey, Jaben" <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
To: Jeff Westfahl <jeff.westfahl@ni.com>,
"edk2-devel@lists.01.org" <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Cc: "Ni, Ruiyu" <ruiyu.ni@intel.com>
Subject: Re: ShellPkg: Difference in behavior of 'dh' between old shell and new
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 17:48:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CB6E33457884FA40993F35157061515C54C08ABC@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1704191228390.2233@jmw-lm181>
That would be welcome; I don't know how it was missed. A caveat is that the shell should use UEFI protocols only. No PI protocols can be required (optional is ok).
Only the specific output controlled by "-sfo" is severely constrained by the spec.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Westfahl [mailto:jeff.westfahl@ni.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:36 AM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: Carsey, Jaben <jaben.carsey@intel.com>; Ni, Ruiyu <ruiyu.ni@intel.com>
> Subject: [edk2] ShellPkg: Difference in behavior of 'dh' between old shell and
> new
> Importance: High
>
> I noticed a difference in behavior of 'dh' between the old shell and the new shell.
> With the old shell, 'dh -v' for a LoadedImage handle shows the
> following:
>
> Handle D3 (3A537F98)
> Image (3A532818) File:MicrocodeUpdate
> ParentHandle..: 3A64F118
> SystemTable...: 3D2A8F18
> DeviceHandle..: 3B1B2098
> FilePath......: FvFile(F3331DE6-4A55-44E4-B767-7453F7A1A021)
> ImageBase.....: 3D650000 - 3D655540
> ImageSize.....: 5540
> CodeType......: RT_code
> DataType......: RT_data
>
> With the new shell, I get this for the same LoadedImage handle:
>
> D3: 3A537F98
> LoadedImage
> Revision......: 0x00001000
> ParentHandle..: 3A64F118
> SystemTable...: 3D2A8F18
> DeviceHandle..: 3B1B2098
> FilePath......: 3A539018
> OptionsSize...: 0
> LoadOptions...: 0
> ImageBase.....: 3D650000
> ImageSize.....: 5540
> CodeType......: EfiRuntimeServicesCode
> DataType......: EfiRuntimeServicesData
> Unload........: 0
>
> The old shell shows the name of the file associated with the LoadedImage,
> which seems like useful information. Is this omission intentional or an oversight?
> Would a patch adding the file name to ShellPkg be welcomed?
>
> Regards,
> Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-19 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-19 17:36 ShellPkg: Difference in behavior of 'dh' between old shell and new Jeff Westfahl
2017-04-19 17:48 ` Carsey, Jaben [this message]
2017-05-04 14:59 ` Jeff Westfahl
2017-05-04 16:31 ` Carsey, Jaben
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CB6E33457884FA40993F35157061515C54C08ABC@FMSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox