From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@intel.com>,
"Justen, Jordan L" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>,
edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OvmfPkg/SmmControl2Dxe: correct PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE in S3 boot script
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:15:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d3cee537-f422-ba64-7ab0-500de8351c3c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503A8DBC96@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On 01/05/17 14:09, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
> Yes, I also agree to add a new MACRO.
>
>
>
> My only concern is the name - POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35_EFI is too weird.
>
> I have no idea on the meaning to use _EFI as suffix.
>
>
>
> Since we already defined below in PciRootBridgeIo.h,
>
> #defineEFI_PCI_ADDRESS(bus, dev, func, reg) \
>
> (UINT64) ( \
>
> (((UINTN) bus) << 24) | \
>
> (((UINTN) dev) << 16) | \
>
> (((UINTN) func) << 8) | \
>
> (((UINTN) (reg)) < 256 ? ((UINTN) (reg)) : (UINT64) (LShiftU64
> ((UINT64) (reg), 32))))
>
>
>
>
>
> How about we use POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35_EFI_PCI_ADDRESS, or
> EFI_PCI_ADDRESS_POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35 ?
POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35_EFI_PCI_ADDRESS() looks fine to me, if Jordan
agrees.
Thanks!
Laszlo
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
> Yao Jiewen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*Laszlo Ersek [mailto:lersek@redhat.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 5, 2017 7:48 PM
> *To:* Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Justen, Jordan L
> <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>; edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@ml01.01.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [edk2] [PATCH] OvmfPkg/SmmControl2Dxe: correct
> PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE in S3 boot script
>
>
>
> On 01/05/17 02:45, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
>> Sorry, fix typo: I agree we do **not** use EFI_ prefix here.
>>
>> But using _EFI as suffix is also odd. :)
>>
>> Do we have better name?
>>
>> Such as POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35_ADDRESS ?
>
> POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35() already returns a flat address, just in PciLib
> encoding. So an _ADDRESS suffix for the variant with the UEFI spec
> encoding is not particularly telling.
>
> The new macro name should reflect the PciLib encoding <-> UEFI spec
> encoding difference.
>
> Thanks!
> Laszlo
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>> Yao Jiewen
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *Yao, Jiewen
>> *Sent:* Thursday, January 5, 2017 9:03 AM
>> *To:* Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.justen@intel.com <mailto:jordan.l.justen@intel.com>>; Laszlo Ersek
>> <lersek@redhat.com
> <mailto:lersek@redhat.com>>; edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [edk2] [PATCH] OvmfPkg/SmmControl2Dxe: correct
>> PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE in S3 boot script
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi
>> I agree we do use EFI_ prefix here.
>>
>> But using _EFI as suffix is also odd. :)
>>
>> Do we have better name?
>>
>> Thank you
>> Yao Jiewen
>>
>> From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Jordan Justen
>> Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 6:02 AM
>> To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com
> <mailto:lersek@redhat.com%0b>> <mailto:lersek@redhat.com>>; edk2-devel-01 <edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org%0b>> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH] OvmfPkg/SmmControl2Dxe: correct PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE in S3 boot script
>>
>> On 2017-01-04 03:19:20, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> On 01/04/17 02:30, Jordan Justen wrote:
>>> > On 2016-12-02 02:48:44, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>> >> @@ -362,7 +390,9 @@ OnS3SaveStateInstalled (
>>> >> S3SaveState,
>>> >> EFI_BOOT_SCRIPT_PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE_OPCODE,
>>> >> EfiBootScriptWidthUint16,
>>> >> - (UINT64)POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35 (ICH9_GEN_PMCON_1),
>>> >> + ConvertPciLibToEfiPciAddress (
>>> >> + POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35 (ICH9_GEN_PMCON_1)
>>> >
>>> > I think we should just add a EFI_POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35 macro.
>>>
>>> I thought of that, but I didn't want to use the EFI_ prefix for a macro
>>> that has nothing to do with the UEFI / PI specs. Can you suggest an
>>> alternative name? Perhaps POWER_MGMT_REGISTER_Q35_EFI?
>>
>> Good point. Yeah, that name seems fine to me.
>>
>> -Jordan
>> _______________________________________________
>> edk2-devel mailing list
>> edk2-devel@lists.01.org<mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org%3cmailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
>> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org%3cmailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>>
>> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> edk2-devel mailing list
>> edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org> <mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
>> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-05 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-02 10:48 [PATCH] OvmfPkg/SmmControl2Dxe: correct PCI_CONFIG_READ_WRITE in S3 boot script Laszlo Ersek
2017-01-03 11:41 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-01-04 1:30 ` Jordan Justen
2017-01-04 11:19 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-01-04 22:01 ` Jordan Justen
2017-01-05 1:03 ` Yao, Jiewen
2017-01-05 1:45 ` Yao, Jiewen
2017-01-05 11:47 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-01-05 13:09 ` Yao, Jiewen
2017-01-05 13:15 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
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=d3cee537-f422-ba64-7ab0-500de8351c3c@redhat.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