From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=66.187.233.73; helo=mx1.redhat.com; envelope-from=lersek@redhat.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED2E5210D83C5 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 10:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0173D40216F7; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:48:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-123-32.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.123.32]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12EAA215670D; Thu, 2 Aug 2018 17:48:36 +0000 (UTC) To: Rafael Machado Cc: Andrew Fish , "Ni, Ruiyu" , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , "Yao, Jiewen" References: <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503AC75235@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <734D49CCEBEEF84792F5B80ED585239D5BD4FFA1@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <17C6FC15-6D2E-41A6-8996-15E665C4D28F@apple.com> <40832a91-0eca-3b9f-f533-f98666295a25@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2018 19:48:36 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.6 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.5]); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 17:48:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.5]); Thu, 02 Aug 2018 17:48:38 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'10.11.54.6' DOMAIN:'int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com' HELO:'smtp.corp.redhat.com' FROM:'lersek@redhat.com' RCPT:'' Subject: Re: Question about memory map entries X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 17:48:39 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 08/02/18 18:42, Rafael Machado wrote: > Thanks Andrew and Laszlo for the clarification and guidance. > > About Laszlo questions > >> Is the reboot automatic (from the platform firmware), or application / >> user initiated? > Yes. We just do some clean up, finish the events and "return EFI_SUCCESS;" That's really strange. I don't think that's valid or expected behavior. If a boot option exits with success, then, as I understand it, the boot manager is expected to return to the setup UI at once. (I don't have a reference ready for this, but I remember someone mentioning it.) Boot option processing continues only if the current boot option exits with failure. I think the reboot you see is actually a crash. (Not saying that the issue is in your application, just that the reboot should not be triggered by either the application or the platform firmware.) Thanks, Laszlo