-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 146
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Dynamictables: Add SMBIOS dispatcher and generators #510
Open
gmahadevan
wants to merge
11
commits into
tianocore:dynamictables-reorg
Choose a base branch
from
gmahadevan:dynamictables-reorg-upto19
base: dynamictables-reorg
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+4,131
−721
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9c37b5c
DynamicTablesPkg: Define a SMBIOS Structure/Table type
samimujawar 516be73
DynamicTablesPkg: Add SMBIOS table dispatcher
samimujawar d12b8eb
DynamicTablesPkg: Add extern call to build SMBIOS table
gmahadevan e513670
DynamicTablesPkg: Update SMBIOS dispatcher dependency table
samimujawar a0adac2
DynamicTablesPkg: Add Ordered dispatch support for SMBIOS tables
samimujawar 7775d00
DynamicTablesPkg: Add SMBIOS table generation
gmahadevan 27e8150
DynamicTablesPkg: Split the ACPI and SMBIOS table generators
gmahadevan ae913d1
DynamicTablesPkg: Introduce new namespace for SMBIOS Objects
gmahadevan f25b395
DynamicTablesPkg: Smbios Memory Device (Type 17)
gmahadevan 562686e
DynamicTablesPkg: Smbios Physical Memory Array (Type 16)
gmahadevan 777b9c1
DynamicTablesPkg: Smbios Memory Array Mapped Address (Type 19)
gmahadevan File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the documentation for the SmbiosHandle parameter is out of sync with the code. Also, do we need a pointer to the SMBIOS handle?
If the intention is that we might need to extend the functionality to generate the handle in this function and return, then please add a comment to that effect. Then again the order of invocation of the table installation and handle generation would need to change in BuildXXX functions.
Which brings us back to should we support the handle generation in this function in the first place?