Jaben,
"-ec" should be followed by a ID.
The patch fixes when "-ec" is followed by string other than ID, no error is
reported.
Regards,
Ray
>-Original Message-
>From: Carsey, Jaben
>Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 1:06 AM
>To: Ni, Ruiyu ; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
>Cc: Carsey, Jaben
>S
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 06:25:00PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 10 February 2017 at 18:17, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:08PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> From: Jiewen Yao
> >>
> >> Current Arm CpuDxe driver uses EFI_MEMORY_WP for write protection,
> >> accordin
On 10 February 2017 at 18:17, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:08PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> From: Jiewen Yao
>>
>> Current Arm CpuDxe driver uses EFI_MEMORY_WP for write protection,
>> according to UEFI spec, we should use EFI_MEMORY_RO for write protection.
>> The EFI
On 10 February 2017 at 18:16, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:11PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> Since the new DXE page protection for PE/COFF images may invoke
>> EFI_CPU_ARCH_PROTOCOL.SetMemoryAttributes() with only permission
>> attributes set, add support for this in the
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:08PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> From: Jiewen Yao
>
> Current Arm CpuDxe driver uses EFI_MEMORY_WP for write protection,
> according to UEFI spec, we should use EFI_MEMORY_RO for write protection.
> The EFI_MEMORY_WP is the cache attribute instead of memory attrib
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:11PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Since the new DXE page protection for PE/COFF images may invoke
> EFI_CPU_ARCH_PROTOCOL.SetMemoryAttributes() with only permission
> attributes set, add support for this in the AARCH64 MMU code.
>
> Contributed-under: TianoCore Cont
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:10PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Currently, we have not implemented support on 32-bit ARM for managing
> permission bits in the page tables. Since the new DXE page protection
> for PE/COFF images may invoke EFI_CPU_ARCH_PROTOCOL.SetMemoryAttributes()
> with only per
On 10 February 2017 at 17:54, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:09PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> The single user of EfiAttributeToArmAttribute () is the protocol
>> method EFI_CPU_ARCH_PROTOCOL.SetMemoryAttributes(), which uses the
>> return value to compare against the ARM
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:38:09PM +, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> The single user of EfiAttributeToArmAttribute () is the protocol
> method EFI_CPU_ARCH_PROTOCOL.SetMemoryAttributes(), which uses the
> return value to compare against the ARM attributes of an existing mapping,
> to infer whether it
Reviewed-by: Jaben Carsey
Ray,
What is the intended behavior if the user does -ec with no data after it?
-Jaben
> -Original Message-
> From: Ni, Ruiyu
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 12:24 AM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: Carsey, Jaben
> Subject: [PATCH] ShellPkg/pci: Report
On 10 February 2017 at 12:59, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
> Thanks for the info.
>
>
>
> Mike/Vincent also mentioned that FW does not own page tables after
> ExitBootServices(), so the OS would have to relax NX protection of RT code
> pages across SVA.
>
> Or delay setting NX protections on RT code pages u
Thanks for the info.
Mike/Vincent also mentioned that FW does not own page tables after
ExitBootServices(), so the OS would have to relax NX protection of RT code
pages across SVA.
Or delay setting NX protections on RT code pages until after SVA.
I agree with you that we can mark RT region to b
> On 10 Feb 2017, at 11:32, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
>
> Good to learn that ARM/ARCH64 behavior. That is interesting.
>
> Yes, if that is the case, we need figure out a way to make it work.
>
> IMHO, “Undo the protection” directly is also risky.
> Maybe the protection is used or setup by OS purpos
Good to learn that ARM/ARCH64 behavior. That is interesting.
Yes, if that is the case, we need figure out a way to make it work.
IMHO, “Undo the protection” directly is also risky.
Maybe the protection is used or setup by OS purposely before EBS (WoW. ☺).
Unprotecting them in BIOS might break th
That is an interesting question.
A general rule for Capsule App is:
1) If a capsule has CAPSULE_FLAGS_INITIATE_RESET, the CapsuleService will
issue reset. No need to handler in CapsuleApp. (The free memory logic will not
run)
2) If a capsule has CAPSULE_FLAGS_PERSIST_ACROSS_RESET,
Reviewed-by: jiewen@intel.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Zeng, Star
> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 11:41 PM
> To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: Zeng, Star ; Alexei Fedorov
> ; Yao, Jiewen ; Gao, Liming
> ; Kinney, Michael D
> Subject: [PATCH V2] MdePkg ACPI: Incorrect definition
Leo,
On 02/10/17 05:27, Duran, Leo wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
> The new PCD is intended to be OR'ed with the address (upper bits).
> Leo.
if I understand correctly, you only answered Jeff's first question:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Fan, Jeff [mailto:jeff@intel.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, Feb
Hi Jiewen,
I think it might be a logic error for CapsuleApp with
CAPSULE_FLAGS_PERSIST_ACROSS_RESET only capsule. If a capsule only have
CAPSULE_FLAGS_PERSIST_ACROSS_RESET flag, my understanding it will not trigger
reset automatially. User will trigger reset（S3) in OS or application lik
From: Nikolai SAOUKH
GCC7 complaint -- error: ISO C++ forbids comparison between pointer and
integer.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Nikolai SAOUKH
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu
---
BaseTools/Source/C/VfrCompile/VfrUtilityLib.cpp | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 i
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Ruiyu Ni
Cc: Jaben Carsey
---
ShellPkg/Library/UefiShellDebug1CommandsLib/Pci.c | 21 +++--
.../UefiShellDebug1CommandsLib.uni | 2 +-
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
dif
Leo,
CapsuleX64 is a standalone module, PcdGet64
(PcdPteMemoryEncryptionAddressOrMask) could not be used in X64Entry
PageFaultHandler() as PcdPteMemoryEncryptionAddressOrMask may be configured to
DYNAMIC type.
You can use similar logic with PAGE_FAULT_CONTEXT.Page1GSupport to transfer the
Pcd
Reviewed-by: Star Zeng
-Original Message-
From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Leo Duran
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 5:13 AM
To: edk2-de...@ml01.01.org
Cc: Laszlo Ersek ; Tian, Feng ; Brijesh
Singh ; Zeng, Star ; Leo Duran
Subject: [edk2] [PATCH 1
22 matches
Mail list logo
