Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] OvmfPkg/Tcg2ConfigPei: Mark TPM MMIO range as unencrypted for SEV-ES

["Lendacky, Thomas" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>]

On 4/30/21 10:48 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> I need to excuse myself for two items here, where your expectation was
> justified:

No worries, I'm flexible!

Thanks,
Tom

> 
> On 04/28/21 21:43, Tom Lendacky wrote:
>> On 4/28/21 12:51 PM, Laszlo Ersek via groups.io wrote:
>>> I'm going to ask for v3 after all:
>>>
>>> On 04/27/21 18:21, Lendacky, Thomas wrote:
> 
>>>> @@ -627,6 +627,7 @@ [Components]
>>>>  
>>>>  !if $(TPM_ENABLE) == TRUE
>>>>    OvmfPkg/Tcg/Tcg2Config/Tcg2ConfigPei.inf
>>>> +  OvmfPkg/Tcg/TpmMmioSevDecryptPei/TpmMmioSevDecryptPei.inf
>>>>    SecurityPkg/Tcg/TcgPei/TcgPei.inf
>>>>    SecurityPkg/Tcg/Tcg2Pei/Tcg2Pei.inf {
>>>>      <LibraryClasses>
>>>
>>> (5) Functionally correct, but it reads more nicely (from a logical
>>> dependency POV) if we place the new PEIM first.
>>>
>>> (Please apply to the rest of the DSC files, and the FDF files too.)
>>
>> Ok, I was going with the alphabetical placement. I'll switch it up.
> 
> Well, you are not wrong; what I request for ordering between lib classes
> and between FDF/DSC entries is indeed inconsistent. I guess for lib
> classes, showing the construction order makes little, as that is
> determined with respect to particular library instances, plus we wrangle
> lib classes all the time, and keeping consistency is simplest with
> alphabetical ordering. Dispatch order is *somewhat* more directly
> visible in a FDF file... but yes, keeping INF references in alphabetical
> order there too would certainly plausible
> 
>>>> +      DEBUG ((DEBUG_INFO, "%a: failed to map TPM MMIO address range unencrypted\n", __FUNCTION__));
>>>
>>> (13) Overlong line.
>>
>> Ok, I'll change that. I though that was ok now since PatchCheck.py didn't
>> complain.
> 
> Sorry about my pickiness; this is a point where I strongly disagree with
> the rest of the edk2 maintainers -- I really do insist on 80 chars per
> line, as my eyesight isn't the greatest, I totally depend on two code
> windows being shown side by side, and I *also* can't work with multiple
> monitors (I've tried it, I just can't). So... one monitor, mid-size
> fonts, two columns of text --> 80 chars per column.
> 
> Thanks & sorry about the trouble,
> Laszlo
>