Good day,
I have been reading through the recently imported StandaloneMmPkg and found
three odd things.
1. GUID prefixes: GUIDs defined in StandaloneMmPkg.dec either have no common
prefix at all ("gMmFv") or use the "gEfi" prefix. Maybe the MdeModulePkg-style
"gEdkii" prefix could be used for a uniform style?
2. The "gEfiMmConfigurationProtocolGuid" name is common between Standalone
(StandaloneMmPkg.dec) and Traditional (MdePkg.dec) MM context despite having a
different value of course. Shouldn't the naming reflect which is traditional
and which is Standalone? I haven't checked in depth, but which is chosen when a
module consumes both MdePkg and StandaloneMmPkg?
3. While .dec already uses the "Mmram" naming scheme, its header declares
the MemoryReserve GUID as "gEfiMmPeiS(!)mramMemoryReserveGuid". Furthermore,
the header references the SMM CIS (which has been replaced with "MM CIS" as
part of the renaming), while the GUID has changed and the structure does not
match the deprecated specification anyway. May I suggest to turn this GUID into
a "gEdkii"-style GUID and remove all references to the SMM CIS? Maybe use the
"EDKII_" prefix for "EFI_MMRAM_HOB_DESCRIPTOR_BLOCK" too? I wanted to prepare a
patch, but I cannot compile the package at the moment and don't want to risk
submitting anything broken.
Thanks for your time!
Regards,
Marvin.
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
