I have 2 comments.
1. CheckParamName may return None. But according to other part of this
function, it should return True or False.
2. The meaning of ParamList.pop(0) is not much clear.
Thanks,
Bob
-Original Message-
From: Fan, ZhijuX
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2020 4:40 PM
To: devel@ed
On 01/20/20 17:58, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> This is a proposal for a process by which new features can be added to UEFI
> forum specifications after first having been designed and prototyped in the
> open.
>
> This process lets changes and the development of new features happen in the
> open, withou
Amol,
One general comment in advance. The switch/case are using parameter HashPolicy.
Since it's a local variable not constant, I'm not sure whether or not the
compiler
will optimize out not effective hash algorithm choices. Please double check
the linked code. If not, you should not pass the val
This is a proposal for a process by which new features can be added to UEFI
forum specifications after first having been designed and prototyped in the
open.
This process lets changes and the development of new features happen in the
open, without violating the UEFI forum bylaws which prevent publ
Amol,
One comment below.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sukerkar, Amol N
> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2020 6:32 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: Kinney, Michael D ; Yao, Jiewen
> ; Wang, Jian J ; Agrawal,
> Sachin ; Musti, Srinivas ;
> Lakkimsetti, Subash
> Subject: [PATCH v4 1/2] Cry
Thanks for the comment. It will be updated before push.
Regards,
Jian
> -Original Message-
> From: Lu, XiaoyuX
> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2020 10:05 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Wang, Jian J
> Cc: Laszlo Ersek
> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] Remove deprecated code in
> Ba
On 1/8/20 6:00 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
The firmware revision that is queried through the VideoCore mailbox
is really the 32-bit timestamp of when the VideoCore firmware was
generated.
To make this more palatable for human reporting, convert it to a
YY.MM firmware revision, so that end-users can g
Could I have a ping on this, as well as
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/topic/69331625#52611?
It looks to me like the latest RPi related patches have reached some
kind of integration limbo, since I'm not seeing any of those being
requested a v2.
Thanks,
/Pete
On 2020.01.09 15:02, Pete Batar
On 01/20/20 11:12, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:42:45 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> The "--function-context" ("-W") option of git-diff displays the entire
>> body of a modified function, not just small modified hunks within the
>> function. It is useful for reviewers when the c
Check if the NumberOfPrivateResources, ProcessorTopologyStructureType
and ProcessorTopologyStructureLength pointers have been successfully
updated before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
Check if global pointers have been successfully updated before they
are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v2:
- Do not require FadtMinorRevision and X_DsdtAddress pointers to be
valid in order
Check if XsdtAddress pointer has been successfully updated before it
is used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Library/UefiShellAcpiViewCommandLib/
Check if global (in the scope of the IORT parser) pointers have been
successfully updated before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Li
Check if the MadtInterruptControllerType and
MadtInterruptControllerLength pointers have been successfully updated
before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers
Prevent the use of invalid pointers when parsing ACPI tables in the UEFI
shell acpiview tool.
The parsing of ACPI tables is often controlled with the values read
earlier from the same table. For example, the 'Offset' or 'Count' fields
found in a structure are later used to parse the substructures.
Check if global (in the scope of the GTDT parser) pointers have been
successfully updated before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Li
Check if SlitSystemLocalityCount pointer has been successfully updated
before it is used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Library/UefiShellAcpiVie
1. Check if the 'Number of System Localities' provided can be
represented in the SLIT table. The table 'Length' field is a 32-bit
value while the 'Number of System Localities' field is 64-bit long.
2. Check if the SLIT matrix fits in the table buffer. If N is the SLIT
locality count, then the matr
Check if SratRAType and SratRALength pointers have been successfully
updated before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Library/UefiShe
For fields outside the buffer length provided, reset any pointers,
which were supposed to be updated by a ParseAcpi() function call to
NULL. This way one can easily validate if a pointer was successfully
updated.
The ParseAcpi() function parses the given ACPI table buffer by a
number of bytes whic
Check if global (in the scope of the DBG2 parser) pointers have been
successfully updated before they are used for further table parsing.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Koch
---
Notes:
v3:
- Rebase on latest master [Krzysztof]
v1:
- Test against NULL pointers [Krzysztof]
ShellPkg/Li
On 1/20/20 11:27 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
On 01/20/20 10:11, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Hi Liming,
On 1/9/20 6:35 AM, Feng, Bob C wrote:
Reviewed-by: Bob Feng
Is the Review-by tag from Bob enough to get this patch merged?
Yes, see the "M" role:
BaseTools
F: BaseTools/
W: https://github
On 01/20/20 10:11, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Liming,
>
> On 1/9/20 6:35 AM, Feng, Bob C wrote:
>> Reviewed-by: Bob Feng
>
> Is the Review-by tag from Bob enough to get this patch merged?
Yes, see the "M" role:
BaseTools
F: BaseTools/
W: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io
On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 10:42:45 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> The "--function-context" ("-W") option of git-diff displays the entire
> body of a modified function, not just small modified hunks within the
> function. It is useful for reviewers when the code changes to the function
> are small, but
Sure! I don't mind changing the commit message. Shall I resubmit the patch?
Kind regards,
Krzysztof
-Original Message-
From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2020 9:15
To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Krzysztof Koch
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel ; Leif Lindholm
; Michael D Kinney ; Sami
The "--function-context" ("-W") option of git-diff displays the entire
body of a modified function, not just small modified hunks within the
function. It is useful for reviewers when the code changes to the function
are small, but they could affect, or depend on, control flow that is far
away in th
On 1/9/20 10:35 AM, Krzysztof Koch wrote:
Fix 'mAcpiRegistration defined but not used' compiler error for
Dynamic Tables Framework builds.
Do not declare the mAcpiRegistration variable in the Dynamic Tables
Framework context.
An earlier patch made mAcpiRegistration variable STATIC. Reducing the
Hi Liming,
On 1/9/20 6:35 AM, Feng, Bob C wrote:
Reviewed-by: Bob Feng
Is the Review-by tag from Bob enough to get this patch merged?
Thanks,
Phil.
-Original Message-
From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of Philippe
Mathieu-Daudé
Sent: Thursday, Jan
BZ:https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1523
When the keyword after @param doesn't match the actual function
parameter name, ECC doesn't detect such issue
The patch is going to fix this issue
Cc: Liming Gao
Cc: Bob Feng
Signed-off-by: Zhiju.Fan
---
BaseTools/Source/Python/Ecc/c.py
On 1/19/20 6:14 AM, Gao, Liming wrote:
Phil:
Ray talks leave for Chinese New year holiday. I can take back up for him.
For those changes, I agree them.
Acked-by: Liming Gao
Thank you very much Liming!
Thanks
Liming
-Original Message-
From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of P
On 01/19/20 08:03, Gao, Zhichao wrote:
> Hi Laszlo,
>
> Sorry for misunderstanding the logic in read key function. That makes the
> incorrect analysis.
> The read key function is waiting for "specific" key press not a key press. We
> should drop all the other pressing-key.
> That means we should
31 matches
Mail list logo
