Agreed. Let’s please do what’s needed to put dropping this table on the roadmap. - Bret ________________________________ From: devel@edk2.groups.io on behalf of Ard Biesheuvel via Groups.Io Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2020 10:00:39 AM To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: Ni, Ray ; devel@edk2.groups.io ; tigerliu@zhaoxin.com ; Kinney, Michael D ; Leif Lindholm (Nuvia address) ; Jiewen Yao Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [edk2-devel] Questions about UEFI MAT / PcdPropertiesTableEnable On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 17:55, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > On 03/25/20 06:17, Ni, Ray wrote: > >> > >> The properties table should not be used. It has been superseded by the memory attributes table, per spec. > >> > >> In edk2, the properties table is controlled by the PCD, regardless of the memory attributes table. > >> > >> In edk2, the memory attributes table is always produced, regardless of the properties table. > >> > >> Please see the discussion under: > >> > >> [edk2] [patch 0/7] Add UEFI2.6 MemoryAttributesTable support. > >> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmid.mail-archive.com%2F1454069539-4056-1-git-send-email-jiewen.yao%40intel.com&data=02%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C46138683ba554847c60008d7d0de1753%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637207524599988545&sdata=7M4nzzz%2B8UZ2kb4LHyP%2BfBOWFrv5xFuAT19pdAn3kEE%3D&reserved=0 > >> > > ... > > > Do you think we could remove properties table? > > Yes, that's exactly what Ard requested, as soon as Jiewen posted the MAT > series. Back then, Jiewen said that some production OSes were still > using the properties table, and would need time to migrate to MAT. > > The agreement -- four years ago! -- seemed to be that the UEFI spec > should drop the properties table definition in some time, and then edk2 > could remove the reference implementation too. > > See the attached discussion. > > Given that the properties table had been deprecated in the UEFI spec > even in Feb 2016, I think it's now high time to remove it altogether > (both spec and edk2). > > > The existence of both is confusing. > > Yes, very much. > Agreed. We should at least log this as a task, and if anyone has the bandwidth to do the work, plan it for the next stable tag.