On 11 April 2016 at 16:50, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 04/11/16 16:34, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 11 April 2016 at 16:12, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> On 04/11/16 15:43, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > [snip] > >> I simply want to check that the 'pci-ecam-generic' DT node we end up >> consuming is the only one that exists in the device tree. In fact, I >> think it makes sense to assert that PcdPciExpressBaseAddress equals >> the DT node reg property when we encounter it. > > Yes, that definitely makes sense (at least if I understand it > correctly). That is, the library constructor would do the "reg" parsing > / PCD setting / caching etc (for any DXE_DRIVER that uses this instance, > really), and *specifically* PciHostBridgeDxe, when it parses the same > node (for those other two properties), could also look at "reg", and > assert that PcdPciExpressBaseAddress is *already set* the way it expects > it to be. I think that's a good idea. > >>> Do you have a fresh v3-wip branch somewhere? I'd like to try expressing >>> my proposal for patches #13 and #14 in code. (If you are okay with that.) >>> >> >> Sure, give me 30 mins. > > Let's do the following instead (as we discussed off-list): > > Please commit patches v2 1-10 (with the fixes I requested) to the master > branch, and then we can collaborate, on the list, with patches for > fw_cfg and PciExpressLib / PciHostBridgeDxe, directly against the master > branch. >
OK, wip branch is here git://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/uefi-next.git virt-fdt-refactor-v3 Thanks _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
