> On 13 Sep 2018, at 15:15, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/13/18 14:27, Nikita Leshenko wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed explanation. I guess we have no choice
>> but to copy BaseCachingPciExpressLib (renamed to
>> DxePciExpressLibCaching) from ArmVirt to OVMF as well.
>
> Uhh, hold on for a minute :) , "no choice but" is a bit of a stretch.
> Where does OVMF enter the picture to begin with?
>
> Between OvmfPkg and ArmVirtPkg, we have a sort-of rule that ArmVirtPkg
> is allowed to consume OvmfPkg content, but not vice versa. So, we could
> move (and rename) the lib instance from ArmVirtPkg to OvmfPkg, update
> the reference(s) in ArmVirtPkg accordingly, and then consume the lib
> instance in OvmfPkg as well... *if* there was any reason to consume the
> lib instance in OvmfPkg in the first place.
>
> (Of course if, by "we", you meant an internal Oracle use case, then I'm
> not trying to pry. I took "we" as "upstream community". Emails are
> ambiguous! :) )
Yes, I originally meant in upstream community. But I agree with your
comments below, so yes we definitely have a choice :)
>
> I suggest that you please file a bug for MdeModulePkg /
> BasePciExpressLib in the TianoCore Bugzilla, referencing this discussion from
> the
> mailing list archive
Sure, I filed the bug at
https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1178
-Nikita
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.01.org_pipermail_edk2-2Ddevel_2018-2DSeptember_029427.html&d=DwICaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=JD7W0KpKqI3xo5AglC-aIVDRz_ysy5CrQRnZ9Jb7je0&m=kTbOaTuIdbwwl68uu5hSfrQkVeQGmOgSZZgr8guTIAc&s=dBONCYfrLeiUrFWuFes0jATimnx7m278xMXfzfQauqA&e=>,
> and request that (a) either the dynamic PCD use case be fixed, or (b)
> the code own up to the restriction and be explicit about FixedPCD, both
> in the INF file(s) and the C-language APIs.
>
> Thanks!
> Laszlo
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
