Good point. The Spec revision can run ahead of the supported INF_VERSION values if the spec changes are only clarifications.
1.27 is the highest INF_VERSION value currently documented. I agree moving to 1.30 for spec and INF_VERSION is correct. Mike > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Laszlo > Ersek > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2024 6:16 AM > To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; > devel@edk2.groups.io > Cc: Abdul Lateef Attar <abdat...@amd.com>; Abner Chang > <abner.ch...@amd.com>; Warkentin, Andrei <andrei.warken...@intel.com>; > Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com>; Ard Biesheuvel > <ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org>; S, Ashraf Ali <ashraf.al...@intel.com>; > Bibo Mao <maob...@loongson.cn>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.f...@intel.com>; > West, Catharine <catharine.w...@intel.com>; Chao Li > <lic...@loongson.cn>; Chiu, Chasel <chasel.c...@intel.com>; Duggapu, > Chinni B <chinni.b.dugg...@intel.com>; Duke Zhai <duke.z...@amd.com>; > Aktas, Erdem <erdemak...@google.com>; Eric Xing <eric.x...@amd.com>; > Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Guo, Gua <gua....@intel.com>; Dong, > Guo <guo.d...@intel.com>; Igniculus Fu <igniculus...@amd.com>; Lu, > James <james...@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com>; Kelly > Steele <kelly.ste...@intel.com>; Ken Yao <ken....@amd.com>; Leif > Lindholm <quic_llind...@quicinc.com>; Liming Gao > <gaolim...@byosoft.com.cn>; Michael Roth <michael.r...@amd.com>; Xu, > Min M <min.m...@intel.com>; Desimone, Nathaniel L > <nathaniel.l.desim...@intel.com>; Paul Grimes <paul.gri...@amd.com>; > Kumar, Rahul R <rahul.r.ku...@intel.com>; Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com>; > Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com>; Chaganty, Rangasai V > <rangasai.v.chaga...@intel.com>; Sami Mujawar <sami.muja...@arm.com>; > Rhodes, Sean <sean@starlabs.systems>; Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; > Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com>; Mohapatra, Susovan > <susovan.mohapa...@intel.com>; Kuo, Ted <ted....@intel.com>; Tom > Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; USER0FISH <libing1...@outlook.com>; > Xianglai li <lixiang...@loongson.cn>; Chen, Christine > <yuwei.c...@intel.com>; caiyuqing379 <caiyuqing...@outlook.com>; dahogn > <dah...@hotmail.com>; meng-cz <mengcz1...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] BaseTools/AutoGen: declare > ProcessLibraryConstructorList() for SEC modules > > On 2/15/24 18:29, Kinney, Michael D wrote: > > Hi Laszlo, > > > > I was also thinking the INF Version would be best approach. > > > > I recommend we identify the EDK II Build Specification and > > EDK II INF Specification changes required to resolve this > > issue. > > > > https://github.com/tianocore-docs/edk2-BuildSpecification > > https://github.com/tianocore-docs/edk2-InfSpecification > > > > > > The current INF Spec uses INF_VERSION of 1.27. > > > > Should the new version be 1.28, or is there something I am > > missing where 1.30 would be required? Or are you wanting > > to jump from 1.2x to 1.3x to indicate a behavior change? > > The latest draft is at 1.29: > > https://tianocore-docs.github.io/edk2-InfSpecification/draft/#edk-ii- > module-information-inf-file-specification > > (also visible at the bottom of the README.md changelog at your link > <https://github.com/tianocore-docs/edk2-InfSpecification>), > > for addressing TianoCore#1952 (MODULE_TYPE=HOST_APPLICATION). > > And, there is already a good number of modules present in both edk2 and > edk2-devel that specify "INF_VERSION = 1.29". > > I figured we'd want to break away cleanly even from the draft (= latest > unreleased) spec. > > Thanks! > Laszlo > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > >> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 11:58 PM > >> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D > >> <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > >> Cc: Abdul Lateef Attar <abdat...@amd.com>; Abner Chang > >> <abner.ch...@amd.com>; Warkentin, Andrei > <andrei.warken...@intel.com>; > >> Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com>; Ard Biesheuvel > >> <ardb+tianoc...@kernel.org>; S, Ashraf Ali <ashraf.al...@intel.com>; > >> Bibo Mao <maob...@loongson.cn>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.f...@intel.com>; > >> West, Catharine <catharine.w...@intel.com>; Chao Li > >> <lic...@loongson.cn>; Chiu, Chasel <chasel.c...@intel.com>; Duggapu, > >> Chinni B <chinni.b.dugg...@intel.com>; Duke Zhai > <duke.z...@amd.com>; > >> Aktas, Erdem <erdemak...@google.com>; Eric Xing <eric.x...@amd.com>; > >> Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Guo, Gua <gua....@intel.com>; > Dong, > >> Guo <guo.d...@intel.com>; Igniculus Fu <igniculus...@amd.com>; Lu, > >> James <james...@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com>; > Kelly > >> Steele <kelly.ste...@intel.com>; Ken Yao <ken....@amd.com>; Leif > >> Lindholm <quic_llind...@quicinc.com>; Liming Gao > >> <gaolim...@byosoft.com.cn>; Michael Roth <michael.r...@amd.com>; Xu, > >> Min M <min.m...@intel.com>; Desimone, Nathaniel L > >> <nathaniel.l.desim...@intel.com>; Paul Grimes <paul.gri...@amd.com>; > >> Kumar, Rahul R <rahul.r.ku...@intel.com>; Ni, Ray > <ray...@intel.com>; > >> Rebecca Cran <rebe...@bsdio.com>; Chaganty, Rangasai V > >> <rangasai.v.chaga...@intel.com>; Sami Mujawar > <sami.muja...@arm.com>; > >> Rhodes, Sean <sean@starlabs.systems>; Zeng, Star > <star.z...@intel.com>; > >> Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com>; Mohapatra, Susovan > >> <susovan.mohapa...@intel.com>; Kuo, Ted <ted....@intel.com>; Tom > >> Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; USER0FISH > <libing1...@outlook.com>; > >> Xianglai li <lixiang...@loongson.cn>; Chen, Christine > >> <yuwei.c...@intel.com>; caiyuqing379 <caiyuqing...@outlook.com>; > dahogn > >> <dah...@hotmail.com>; meng-cz <mengcz1...@gmail.com> > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] BaseTools/AutoGen: declare > >> ProcessLibraryConstructorList() for SEC modules > >> > >> On 2/8/24 17:40, Michael D Kinney wrote: > >>> Hi Laszlo, > >>> > >>> I need to review the proposed BaseTools/AutoGen change to see what > >> options > >>> are available for compatibility. > >>> > >>> My main concern is downstream consumers that may break immediately > >> with > >>> a change like this and we need a way for them to be informed and > have > >>> time to update their components just like you outline a sequence to > >> update > >>> the edk2 repo components. > >> > >> Should AutoGen declare ProcessLibraryConstructorList() for a SEC > module > >> if INF_VERSION >= 1.30? > >> > >> Or should we introduce a new macro in [Defines]? > >> > >> https://tianocore-docs.github.io/edk2- > >> InfSpecification/draft/2_inf_overview/24_[defines]_section.html > >> > >> "EDK II parsing utilities will use some of this section's > information > >> for generating AutoGen.c and AutoGen.h files." > >> > >> I'd prefer (INF_VERSION >= 1.30) over a dedicated macro. We should > >> ensure, over time, that ProcessLibraryConstructorList() is declared > by > >> default, for SEC modules. If that declaration depended on an > explicit > >> new macro in [Defines], it would much less likely become the > default. > >> > >> Laszlo > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#115543): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/115543 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104210524/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
