On 2015-06-08 02:06:40, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 06/06/15 21:10, Paulo Alcantara wrote: > > diff --git a/OvmfPkg/OvmfPkg.dec b/OvmfPkg/OvmfPkg.dec > > index 4cb70dc..a6586f3 100644 > > --- a/OvmfPkg/OvmfPkg.dec > > +++ b/OvmfPkg/OvmfPkg.dec > > @@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ > > # to PIIX4 function 3 offset 0x40-0x43 bits [15:6]. > > gUefiOvmfPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdAcpiPmBaseAddress|0xB000|UINT16|5 > > > > + ## This flag determines the Root Complex Register Block BAR, written to > > Q35 > > + # function 31 offset 0xf0-0xf3 bits [31:14] > > + > > gUefiOvmfPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdRootComplexBaseAddress|0xfed1c000|UINT32|0x1e > > + > > I understand Jordan doesn't like the new PCD here, and proposes a > fixed macro for the same purpose, but I don't understand why we > should follow a different avenue for this base address when we opted > for a PCD with the PMBA.
I'm not sure there is a good reason for the PMBA PCD at this point. Do you remember why we decided to add a PCD? It doesn't actually change values. I wonder if we were only half committed to the 0x400 => 0xb000 value change at that point? :) I could also see adding a PCD if it looks better for some 'common' code to key off of the PCD, rather than including a chipset specific include file. -Jordan