Hi all, I'm writing because I'm considering applying once again for GSoC to continue my work on the audio output subsystem, specifically focusing on either HDA or USB audio. Last year I came

Pushed as 0fdfe217..c32222fe. Mike

Reviewed-by: Michael Kubacki <michael.kubacki@...>

Hi Theo, Yup you are totally correct. There are a lot of features and services that exist in a real hardware UEFI firmware that do not exist in OVMF. If you are trying to build some new code to

Hi All, Pedro is 100% correct. The primary use case and the reason I added this is to remove library duplication across all the .efi files. This is actually super valuable because LZMA compression

Hi Marvin,

Hi Ada, Great to meet you and welcome to the TianoCore project! Great to hear you are interested! Despite Marvin's misgivings, I think dynamic linking would be an excellent addition to EDK II! Marvin

Copy code from PrePi to PrePeiCore that prints the firmware version and build date early in the boot process. Signed-off-by: Rebecca Cran <quic_rcran@...> ---

From: Guo Dong <guo.dong@...> When Quite parameter is not provided, its default value would be "None" instead of "". So update its default value not to impact the build. Cc: Ray Ni

Which is already possible as part of protocols. In fact, there are such for string and device path operations. What about that model justifies a fundamental change? The worst issue is PEI because of

GSoC tip: Try to spread your proposals out. If we don't have enough project slots for you, all your 3 proposals get rejected and your GSoC participation goes out the window. Take a look at our project

Hi Marvin, Ada, Some comments: I don't think the purpose of the dynamic linker is to treat EFI as a complete operating system, but to try to eliminate the static linking that may be needlessly

i can submit up to three proposals. I'll give all of this some thought and a little research and start putting at least two proposals together starting Friday. :)

i was replying via the groups.io web interface, I'm guessing that messed up the thread? i haven't used mailing lists before and don't know how they work. I'll use my mail client from here on. I'm on

Acked-by: Michael Kubacki <michael.kubacki@...>

Thanks. If there's agreement I can put together a set of patches to remove support from the various places we have it in the tree (e.g. here, Conf/tools_def.txt etc.) -- Rebecca Cran

RVCT is 32-bit only, as far as I know, so I don't think anyone still cares about it.

Cc: Michael Kubacki <mikuback@...> Signed-off-by: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@...> --- Maintainers.txt | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/Maintainers.txt

Agreed. How about fuzz-testing? This is also something edk2 needs quite badly. At Acidanthera, we compile edk2 code in userspace outside the edk2 build system and fuzz with dummy applications. Pedro

Oh I see what was meant - ignore me! I do think it would be good to have more discussions on edk2-discuss though :) -- Rebecca Cran