Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 10/19/23 16:37, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> It was introduced in 2.39 it seems.

Hm, then the macros should still be added please; RHEL9/EPEL9 only offer
binutils 2.38.

> GCC 12 onwards contains this
> binutils version as per my understanding.

No, gcc doesn't "contain" binutils. They are separate packages, and
their versions are not tightly locked together.

> This version was released
> quite long back. I can double check by submitting it through edk2 CI to
> ensure it works. Current CI version is already GCC 12.

It's the binutils version that matters for this.

(And even if CI has gcc-12, I'd still ask for the macros, because RHEL9
/ EPEL9 don't seem to have a new enough binutils.)

Thanks
Laszlo

> 
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 5:47 PM Laszlo Ersek  > wrote:
> 
> On 10/19/23 11:22, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > On 10/19/23 08:48, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> 
> >> (11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than
> >> magic constants, but raw encodings of machine instructions don't
> belong
> >> into a
> >>      C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced
> thinking what
> >> if all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in
> >> edk2 GCC 12 supports it
> >>      we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it
> easy and
> >> simple to consume for others.
> >
> > To be honest, I can't determine the minimum expected gcc version for
> > edk2. "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template" states a minimum version for
> > NASM, for example, but I can't find a similar gcc requirement there.
> >
> > gcc-12 does work for me personally, because my riscv cross-compiler is
> > "riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat Cross
> 12.1.1-1)".
> >
> > If the CI environment that builds these patches also provides gcc-12+,
> > then I figure you should be set.
> 
> Wait, for the assembly language source files, what matters is the
> binutils version, not the gcc version. Mine is "GNU assembler version
> 2.38-3.el9" (from "binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu-2.38-3.el9.x86_64").
> 
> Is that sufficient for the instuctions in question?
> 
> (More generally -- what version does our CI env expect / provide?)
> 
> Thanks
> Laszlo
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks!
> =D



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109816): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109816
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: 
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Dhaval Sharma]

It was introduced in 2.39 it seems. GCC 12 onwards contains this binutils
version as per my understanding. This version was released quite long back.
I can double check by submitting it through edk2 CI to ensure it works.
Current CI version is already GCC 12.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 5:47 PM Laszlo Ersek  wrote:

> On 10/19/23 11:22, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > On 10/19/23 08:48, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
>
> >> (11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than
> >> magic constants, but raw encodings of machine instructions don't belong
> >> into a
> >>  C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced thinking what
> >> if all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in
> >> edk2 GCC 12 supports it
> >>  we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it easy and
> >> simple to consume for others.
> >
> > To be honest, I can't determine the minimum expected gcc version for
> > edk2. "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template" states a minimum version for
> > NASM, for example, but I can't find a similar gcc requirement there.
> >
> > gcc-12 does work for me personally, because my riscv cross-compiler is
> > "riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat Cross 12.1.1-1)".
> >
> > If the CI environment that builds these patches also provides gcc-12+,
> > then I figure you should be set.
>
> Wait, for the assembly language source files, what matters is the
> binutils version, not the gcc version. Mine is "GNU assembler version
> 2.38-3.el9" (from "binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu-2.38-3.el9.x86_64").
>
> Is that sufficient for the instuctions in question?
>
> (More generally -- what version does our CI env expect / provide?)
>
> Thanks
> Laszlo
>
>

-- 
Thanks!
=D


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109813): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109813
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 10/19/23 11:22, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 10/19/23 08:48, Dhaval Sharma wrote:

>> (11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than
>> magic constants, but raw encodings of machine instructions don't belong
>> into a
>>      C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced thinking what
>> if all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in
>> edk2 GCC 12 supports it
>>      we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it easy and
>> simple to consume for others.
> 
> To be honest, I can't determine the minimum expected gcc version for
> edk2. "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template" states a minimum version for
> NASM, for example, but I can't find a similar gcc requirement there.
> 
> gcc-12 does work for me personally, because my riscv cross-compiler is
> "riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat Cross 12.1.1-1)".
> 
> If the CI environment that builds these patches also provides gcc-12+,
> then I figure you should be set.

Wait, for the assembly language source files, what matters is the
binutils version, not the gcc version. Mine is "GNU assembler version
2.38-3.el9" (from "binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu-2.38-3.el9.x86_64").

Is that sufficient for the instuctions in question?

(More generally -- what version does our CI env expect / provide?)

Thanks
Laszlo



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109802): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109802
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: 
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 10/19/23 08:48, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> Hi Laszlo,
> Thanks a lot for your feedback. I have modified my next patchset
> addressing most of the comments. Summary below. But *before I submit the
> final version* I wanted to seek clarification on a few things mentioned
> below with [Dhaval]. Current PR I am planning to
> submit: https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/4928
> 
> 
> I am summarizing all comments for better readability:
> (1) Split into four separate patches, in v6.                     
>  *Done*.- with some comments below
>     1a. Fix previous error from earlier patch that had declaration
> outside baselib.h
>     1b. Renaming RiscVInvalidateDataCacheAsm() to
> RiscVInvalidateDataCacheAsmFence() etc.
>     1c. Adding the new cache maintenance operations to BaseLib,
> including the
>           new assembly instruction encodings.
>     1d. Updating BaseCacheMaintenanceLib (utilizing the new BaseLib
> primitives).
>     1e. I have added another one for RiscvVirt platform kind of an
> override as 5th patch.
> (2)  This belongs to v6 patch#4, because only BaseCacheMaintenanceLib
> needs the PCD.        *Done*
> (3)  "CMO" should be expanded as "cache management operations".       *Done*
> (4)  The whole PCD is insufficiently documented.      *Done*
> (5)  Accordingly, the default value of the PCD should be
> 0x.  *Done*
> (6)  The "MdePkg/MdePkg.uni" file should be kept in sync with dec.   
> *Done*.  [Dhaval] Is this used beyond setup options? For some PCDs I do
> not find an entry in uni.

This is best cleared with the MdePkg maintainers. Some packages don't
include *.uni files at all, but in those that do, my memories are that
we always keep the PCDs in sync between *.dec and *.uni. If I remember
correctly, the *.uni files are also used by the UEFI Packaging Tool
(UPT). I recommend modifying the UNI as well.

> (7)  Belongs to v6 patch#4. *Done*     
> (8)  Please consider appending the "## CONSUMES" hint. *Done*
> (9)  Belongs to v6 patch#3. *Done*
> (10) Belongs to v6 patch#3. *Done*
> (11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than
> magic constants, but raw encodings of machine instructions don't belong
> into a
>      C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced thinking what
> if all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in
> edk2 GCC 12 supports it
>      we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it easy and
> simple to consume for others.

To be honest, I can't determine the minimum expected gcc version for
edk2. "BaseTools/Conf/tools_def.template" states a minimum version for
NASM, for example, but I can't find a similar gcc requirement there.

gcc-12 does work for me personally, because my riscv cross-compiler is
"riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 12.1.1 20220507 (Red Hat Cross 12.1.1-1)".

If the CI environment that builds these patches also provides gcc-12+,
then I figure you should be set.

> (12) Also, filing a feature request (about these instructions). As per
> (11) it is already available.
> (13) As stated above, these two interfaces don't belong here. *Done*
> (14) As stated above, these function declarations don't belong here. *Done*
> (15) I believe this un-indented comment will not pass ECC Check /
>      uncrustify. [Dhaval] I attach my stuart_build logs. I do not see
> specific errors.https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/4928
>  Pull request all passed.
> Am I missing something?

Probably not.

We usually indent the function-top comment bodies by two spaces, but if
neither uncrustify nor ECC complain, then I won't insist.

Thanks
Laszlo

> (16-17-18) The name of the function suggests the return type should be
> BOOLEAN. *Done*
> (19) Should be STATIC, and should *not* be EFIAPI. (Not a public
> interface.) *Done*
> (20) This will definitely not pass uncrustify. If you are talking about
> bad indent seen on Ops and Length- it is fixed. *Done*
> (21) Logging this error for every cache line of the requested range does
> not seem useful. I suggest checking Op before the loop. *Done*
> (22) As stated above, the API renames -- together with the updated
> leading comments -- belong in v6 patch#2. *Done*
> (23) As stated above, the API renames -- together with the updated
> leading comments -- belong in v6 patch#2. *Done*
> (24) The DEBUG message seems bogus; invalidating the whole I-Cache *is*
> what is being requested here. *Done*
> (25-26) The *API* renames belong to v6 patch#2. & The new APIs, plus the
> *file* rename, belong to v6 patch#3. *Done*
> (27) Please use the assembler macros from point (11). Please see (11)
> (28-29-30-31) Please do not abbreviate RISC-V as "RV". It's incredibly
> confusing.  Inconsistent spelling in the patch subject: "RISCV CMO".
> ditto; should be RISC-V.ditto, should be PcdRiscVFeatureOverride *Done*
> (32-33) Total inconsistency, RV64_ versus RV_.  Should be
> RiscVIsCMOEnabled (upper case 

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Dhaval Sharma]

Hi Laszlo,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. I have modified my next patchset addressing
most of the comments. Summary below. But *before I submit the final
version* I wanted to seek clarification on a few things mentioned below
with [Dhaval]. Current PR I am planning to submit:
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/4928

I am summarizing all comments for better readability:
(1) Split into four separate patches, in v6.   *Done*.-
with some comments below
1a. Fix previous error from earlier patch that had declaration outside
baselib.h
1b. Renaming RiscVInvalidateDataCacheAsm() to
RiscVInvalidateDataCacheAsmFence() etc.
1c. Adding the new cache maintenance operations to BaseLib, including
the
  new assembly instruction encodings.
1d. Updating BaseCacheMaintenanceLib (utilizing the new BaseLib
primitives).
1e. I have added another one for RiscvVirt platform kind of an override
as 5th patch.
(2)  This belongs to v6 patch#4, because only BaseCacheMaintenanceLib needs
the PCD.*Done*
(3)  "CMO" should be expanded as "cache management operations".   *Done*
(4)  The whole PCD is insufficiently documented.  *Done*
(5)  Accordingly, the default value of the PCD should be
0x.  *Done*
(6)  The "MdePkg/MdePkg.uni" file should be kept in sync with dec.
*Done*.  [Dhaval] Is this used beyond setup options? For some PCDs I do not
find an entry in uni.
(7)  Belongs to v6 patch#4. *Done*
(8)  Please consider appending the "## CONSUMES" hint. *Done*
(9)  Belongs to v6 patch#3. *Done*
(10) Belongs to v6 patch#3. *Done*
(11) I agree that we should use symbolic names rather than magic constants,
but raw encodings of machine instructions don't belong into a
 C header file. [Dhaval] This bytecode was introduced thinking what if
all compilers do not support it. but given the default compiler in edk2 GCC
12 supports it
 we can eliminate this byte encoding completely to make it easy and
simple to consume for others.
(12) Also, filing a feature request (about these instructions). As per (11)
it is already available.
(13) As stated above, these two interfaces don't belong here. *Done*
(14) As stated above, these function declarations don't belong here. *Done*
(15) I believe this un-indented comment will not pass ECC Check /
 uncrustify. [Dhaval] I attach my stuart_build logs. I do not see
specific errors.https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/4928 Pull request
all passed. Am I missing something?
(16-17-18) The name of the function suggests the return type should be
BOOLEAN. *Done*
(19) Should be STATIC, and should *not* be EFIAPI. (Not a public
interface.) *Done*
(20) This will definitely not pass uncrustify. If you are talking about bad
indent seen on Ops and Length- it is fixed. *Done*
(21) Logging this error for every cache line of the requested range does
not seem useful. I suggest checking Op before the loop. *Done*
(22) As stated above, the API renames -- together with the updated leading
comments -- belong in v6 patch#2. *Done*
(23) As stated above, the API renames -- together with the updated leading
comments -- belong in v6 patch#2. *Done*
(24) The DEBUG message seems bogus; invalidating the whole I-Cache *is*
what is being requested here. *Done*
(25-26) The *API* renames belong to v6 patch#2. & The new APIs, plus the
*file* rename, belong to v6 patch#3. *Done*
(27) Please use the assembler macros from point (11). Please see (11)
(28-29-30-31) Please do not abbreviate RISC-V as "RV". It's incredibly
confusing.  Inconsistent spelling in the patch subject: "RISCV CMO". ditto;
should be RISC-V.ditto, should be PcdRiscVFeatureOverride *Done*
(32-33) Total inconsistency, RV64_ versus RV_.  Should be RiscVIsCMOEnabled
(upper case V). *Done*

On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 8:09 PM Laszlo Ersek  wrote:

> On 10/17/23 14:17, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> > This PCD provides a way for platform to override any
> > HW features that are default enabled by previous stages
> > of FW (like OpenSBI). For the case where previous/prev
> > stage has disabled the feature, this override is not
> > useful and its usage should be avoided.
> >
> > Ard Biesheuvel 
> > Jiewen Yao 
> > Jordan Justen 
> > Gerd Hoffmann 
> > Sunil V L 
> > Andrei Warkentin 
>
> (4) You forgot to prepend "Cc:".
>
> (5) The cover letter (0/2 email here) should contain all the Cc: tags
> from the patches' commit messages, so that whoever gets at least one
> patch CC'd from the series also get the cover letter for the series.
>
> Thanks
> Laszlo
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dhaval Sharma 
> > ---
> >  OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> > index fe320525153f..8b5e010316ba 100644
> > --- a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> > +++ b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> > @@ -203,6 +203,8 @@ [PcdsFeatureFlag]
> >gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdInstallAcpiSdtPr

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 10/17/23 14:17, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> This PCD provides a way for platform to override any
> HW features that are default enabled by previous stages
> of FW (like OpenSBI). For the case where previous/prev
> stage has disabled the feature, this override is not
> useful and its usage should be avoided.
> 
> Ard Biesheuvel 
> Jiewen Yao 
> Jordan Justen 
> Gerd Hoffmann 
> Sunil V L 
> Andrei Warkentin 

(4) You forgot to prepend "Cc:".

(5) The cover letter (0/2 email here) should contain all the Cc: tags
from the patches' commit messages, so that whoever gets at least one
patch CC'd from the series also get the cover letter for the series.

Thanks
Laszlo

> 
> Signed-off-by: Dhaval Sharma 
> ---
>  OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc 
> b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> index fe320525153f..8b5e010316ba 100644
> --- a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> +++ b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> @@ -203,6 +203,8 @@ [PcdsFeatureFlag]
>gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdInstallAcpiSdtProtocol|TRUE
>  
>  [PcdsFixedAtBuild.common]
> +  gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdRVFeatureOverride|0
> +
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumUnicodeStringLength|100
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumAsciiStringLength|100
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumLinkedListLength|0



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109689): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109689
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: 
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Laszlo Ersek]

On 10/17/23 14:17, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> This PCD provides a way for platform to override any
> HW features that are default enabled by previous stages
> of FW (like OpenSBI). For the case where previous/prev
> stage has disabled the feature, this override is not
> useful and its usage should be avoided.
> 
> Ard Biesheuvel 
> Jiewen Yao 
> Jordan Justen 
> Gerd Hoffmann 
> Sunil V L 
> Andrei Warkentin 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dhaval Sharma 
> ---
>  OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc 
> b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> index fe320525153f..8b5e010316ba 100644
> --- a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> +++ b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
> @@ -203,6 +203,8 @@ [PcdsFeatureFlag]
>gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdInstallAcpiSdtProtocol|TRUE
>  
>  [PcdsFixedAtBuild.common]
> +  gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdRVFeatureOverride|0
> +
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumUnicodeStringLength|100
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumAsciiStringLength|100
>gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumLinkedListLength|0

(1) This patch should be v6 patch#5.

(2) The commit message belongs *as documentation* into v6 patch#4 -- the
BaseCacheMaintenanceLib update.

(3) The commit message on *this* patch (i.e., v6 patch#5) should explain
*why* we want to disable the cache management operations on RiscVVirt.

Thanks
Laszlo



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109687): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109687
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: 
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy 
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[edk2-devel] [PATCH v5 2/2] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Override for RV CPU Features

[Dhaval Sharma]

This PCD provides a way for platform to override any
HW features that are default enabled by previous stages
of FW (like OpenSBI). For the case where previous/prev
stage has disabled the feature, this override is not
useful and its usage should be avoided.

Ard Biesheuvel 
Jiewen Yao 
Jordan Justen 
Gerd Hoffmann 
Sunil V L 
Andrei Warkentin 

Signed-off-by: Dhaval Sharma 
---
 OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc 
b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
index fe320525153f..8b5e010316ba 100644
--- a/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
+++ b/OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt/RiscVVirt.dsc.inc
@@ -203,6 +203,8 @@ [PcdsFeatureFlag]
   gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdInstallAcpiSdtProtocol|TRUE
 
 [PcdsFixedAtBuild.common]
+  gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdRVFeatureOverride|0
+
   gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumUnicodeStringLength|100
   gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumAsciiStringLength|100
   gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdMaximumLinkedListLength|0
-- 
2.39.2



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#109679): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/109679
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102016149/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-