thank you, Ray!
thank you!
Yao, Jiewen
> 在 2021年11月12日，上午11:19，Ni, Ray 写道：
>
> Jiewen,
> Sure. I am ok with this.
> Acked-by: Ray Ni
> It doesn't make the code worse. Dynamic PCD was there already.
>
> Thanks,
> Ray
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Yao, Jiewen
>> Sent: Frida
Jiewen,
Sure. I am ok with this.
Acked-by: Ray Ni
It doesn't make the code worse. Dynamic PCD was there already.
Thanks,
Ray
> -Original Message-
> From: Yao, Jiewen
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 10:29 AM
> To: Brijesh Singh ; Ni, Ray ;
> devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: James Bottomle
Brijesh and Ray
I don’t disagree the disadvantage of dynamic PCD.
However, dynamic PCD is widely used in today's solution.
If developers know clearly when this PCD value is finalized, then it won't be a
problem.
Otherwise, I prefer we drop the dynamic PCD support in EDKII infrastructure.
That w
Hi Ray,
On 11/11/21 8:00 AM, Ni, Ray wrote:
I don't prefer to use a dynamic PCD for passing data.
Because developers don't know when this PCD value is finalized (PCD always has
a default value).
If the value is determined in PEI and consumed in DXE, HOB is a better choice.
If the value is det
I don't prefer to use a dynamic PCD for passing data.
Because developers don't know when this PCD value is finalized (PCD always has
a default value).
If the value is determined in PEI and consumed in DXE, HOB is a better choice.
If the value is determined in PEI and consumed in PEI, PPI is a be
BZ: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3275
While initializing APs, the MpInitLib may need to know whether the
guest is running with active AMD SEV or Intel TDX memory encryption.
Add a new ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr PCD that can be used to query
the memory encryption attribute.
