Re: [edk2-devel] [plaforms/devel-riscv-v2 PATCHv2 10/14] U500Pkg/Library: Library instances of U500 platform library

["Abner Chang" <abner.chang@hpe.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of
> Leif Lindholm
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 7:19 PM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Chang, Abner (HPS SW/FW Technologist)
> <abner.chang@hpe.com>
> Cc: Chen, Gilbert <gilbert.chen@hpe.com>; Palmer Dabbelt
> <palmer@sifive.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [plaforms/devel-riscv-v2 PATCHv2 10/14]
> U500Pkg/Library: Library instances of U500 platform library
> 
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 07:44:47AM +0000, Abner Chang wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chang, Abner (HPS SW/FW Technologist)
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 10:21 AM
> > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; leif.lindholm@linaro.org; Chen, Gilbert
> > > <gilbert.chen@hpe.com>
> > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
> > > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [plaforms/devel-riscv-v2 PATCHv2 10/14]
> > > U500Pkg/Library: Library instances of U500 platform library
> 
> > > > Seeing this, I have a bit of a feeling that this Opensbi isn't
> > > > being consistently
> > > > treated/named:
> > > > - In edk2, we have RiscVPkg/Library/RiscVOpensbiLib which implements
> > > >   class RiscVOpensbiLib.
> > > > - Here, we have U500Pkg/Library/OpenSbiPlatformLib implementing
> the
> > > >   class OpenSbiPlatformLib.
> > > > - *Logically*, what we have is
> > > >   Platform/RiscV/Universal/Sec/SecMain.inf which depends on the
> > > >   OpensbiLib which depends on the OpenSbiPlatformLib.
> > > >   - However, there is no OpenSbiPlatformLib in edk2, which is very
> > > >     unfortunate because that does not let us build edk2/RiscVPkg in
> > > >     isolation (like we can with all the other packages in edk2).
> > > Will name it as Opensbi.
> > > >
> > > > Here is my preferred solution for untangling this:
> > > > 1) Standardise on OpenSbi or Opensbi. Opensbi follows the pattern we
> > > >    already use for Openssl, so would be my preference.
> > > > 2) Standardise on RiscVOpensbi or Opensbi - both for filenames and
> > > >    LibararyClasses. Either is fine, the former is less likely to clash
> > > >    with other imported projects in the future (but I would estimate
> > > >    this risk as *very* low to begin with).
> > > > 3) Implement a (RiscV)OpensbiPlatformLibNull in
> > > > edk2/RiscVPkg/Library,
> > > I will have OpensbiPlatformLibNull  in RiscVPlatformPkg/Library
> > >
> > > >    containing only what is required to build/link
> > > >    RiscVPkg/Library/(RiscV)OpensbiLib/.
> > > >    3.5) Map that to OpensbiPlatformLib in RiscVPkg/RiscVPkg.dsc.
> > > >    3.6) Add a depedency on OpensbiPlatformLib to
> > > >         (RiscV)OpensbiLib.inf
> > > >    3.7) Drop the dependency on OpensbiPlatformLib from
> > > >         Platform/RiscV/Universal/Sec/SecMain.inf
> > >
> > > Above work for me
> >
> > I changed my mind. Due to SecMain is moved to RiscVPlatformPkg in
> > edk2 and requires both RiscVOpensbiPlatformLib and RiscVOpensbLiib,
> > SecMain.inf still has dependency with these two libs.
> 
> I am not sure I understand.
> 
> What I am saying is that OpensbiLib already has a dependency on
> OpensbiPlatformLib. So there is no benefit to adding the OpensbiPlatformLib
> dependency to SecMain. Or does that not work for some reason?

In order to make those dependencies correct, below is the new changes,

RiscVOpensbiPlatformLib has NO dependency with RiscVOpensbiLib.
RiscVOpensbiLib has NO dependency with RiscVOpensbiPlatformLib.
SecMain.inf has dependencies with both RiscVOpensbiPlatformLib and RiscVOpensbiLib because SecMain.inf needs the functionalities of those libs.
Abner
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Leif
> 
>