Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable
Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of
debug messages that:
(a) are relevant for developers,
(b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality
suffers in practice.
Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first
is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the
double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status
EFI_SUCCESS).
Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most
serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries
both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such
platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users,
as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do --
in practice, nothing malfunctions.
(Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D
DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".)
Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com>
Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com>
Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>
Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
Ref: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3410
Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
---
MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644
--- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
+++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock (
EFI_STATUS Status;
VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy;
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__));
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n"));
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n"));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName));
NewPolicy = NULL;
Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy(
@@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock (
//
// If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the
// current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If it's
- // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so the
+ // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so the
// duplicate lock can be removed.
//
if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) {
Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL);
if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) {
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName));
Status = EFI_SUCCESS;
} else {
DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName));
--
2.19.1.3.g30247aa5d201
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#75449): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75449
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/82995877/1787277
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Reviewed-by: Bret Barkelew bret.barkelew@microsoft.com<mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> I don’t regret making it ERROR at first because now no one can claim to have not been warned when the interface drops, but I agree that lowering to WARN now is prudent. - Bret From: Laszlo Ersek<mailto:lersek@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 1:40 PM To: edk2-devel-groups-io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> Cc: Bret Barkelew<mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; Hao A Wu<mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Jian J Wang<mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com>; Liming Gao<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé<mailto:philmd@redhat.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of debug messages that: (a) are relevant for developers, (b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality suffers in practice. Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status EFI_SUCCESS). Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users, as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do -- in practice, nothing malfunctions. (Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".) Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com> Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com> Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> Ref: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3410&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f0608d91c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2FU%3D&reserved=0 Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021 Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> --- MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644 --- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( EFI_STATUS Status; VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy; - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); NewPolicy = NULL; Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy( @@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( // // If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the // current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If it's - // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so the + // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so the // duplicate lock can be removed. // if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) { Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL); if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) { - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); Status = EFI_SUCCESS; } else { DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); -- 2.19.1.3.g30247aa5d201 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#75450): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75450 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/82995928/1787277 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On 05/21/21 22:43, Bret Barkelew via groups.io wrote: > Reviewed-by: Bret Barkelew bret.barkelew@microsoft.com<mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> > Thanks! > I don’t regret making it ERROR at first because now no one can claim to have not been warned when the interface drops, I agree that this argument works -- on the other hand, we shouldn't forget that edk2's own BdsDxe and UefiBootManagerLib (and apparently some other modules) still consume the Variable Lock Protocol. (That's how I encountered these messages myself.) IOW we can't expect downstreams to stop consuming the Variable Lock Protocol before edk2 itself does. > but I agree that lowering to WARN now is prudent. Thanks again! Laszlo > > - Bret > > From: Laszlo Ersek<mailto:lersek@redhat.com> > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 1:40 PM > To: edk2-devel-groups-io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> > Cc: Bret Barkelew<mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; Hao A Wu<mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Jian J Wang<mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com>; Liming Gao<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Kinney, Michael D<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé<mailto:philmd@redhat.com> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN > > Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable > Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of > debug messages that: > > (a) are relevant for developers, > > (b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality > suffers in practice. > > Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first > is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the > double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status > EFI_SUCCESS). > > Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most > serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries > both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such > platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users, > as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do -- > in practice, nothing malfunctions. > > (Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D > DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".) > > Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> > Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com> > Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com> > Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> > Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > Ref: https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3410&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f0608d91c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2FU%3D&reserved=0 > Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021 > Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> > --- > MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644 > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > EFI_STATUS Status; > VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy; > > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > > NewPolicy = NULL; > Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy( > @@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > // > // If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the > // current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If it's > - // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so the > + // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so the > // duplicate lock can be removed. > // > if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) { > Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL); > if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) { > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > Status = EFI_SUCCESS; > } else { > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > -- > 2.19.1.3.g30247aa5d201 > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#75458): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75458 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/82995928/1787277 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>
I am ok to merge this patch for stable tag 202105.
Thanks
Liming
发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> 代表 Bret Barkelew via
groups.io
发送时间: 2021年5月22日 4:43
收件人: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; edk2-devel-groups-io
<devel@edk2.groups.io>
抄送: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>;
Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Kinney, Michael D
<michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
主题: Re: [edk2-devel] [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH]
MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN
Reviewed-by: Bret Barkelew bret.barkelew@microsoft.com
<mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com>
I don’t regret making it ERROR at first because now no one can claim to
have not been warned when the interface drops, but I agree that lowering to
WARN now is prudent.
- Bret
From: Laszlo Ersek <mailto:lersek@redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 1:40 PM
To: edk2-devel-groups-io <mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
Cc: Bret Barkelew <mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com> ; Hao A Wu
<mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com> ; Jian J Wang <mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com> ;
Liming Gao <mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> ; Kinney, Michael D
<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com> ; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
<mailto:philmd@redhat.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] MdeModulePkg/VariableLock:
downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN
Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable
Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of
debug messages that:
(a) are relevant for developers,
(b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality
suffers in practice.
Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first
is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the
double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status
EFI_SUCCESS).
Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most
serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries
both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such
platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users,
as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do --
in practice, nothing malfunctions.
(Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D
DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".)
Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com
<mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> >
Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com <mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com> >
Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com <mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com> >
Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn <mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> >
Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com
<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com> >
Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com <mailto:philmd@redhat.com> >
Ref:
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.t
ianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3410 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection.
outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D
3410&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f06
08d91c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812
%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWw
iLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2
FU%3D&reserved=0>
&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f0608d9
1c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812%7CU
nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ
XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2FU%3
D&reserved=0
Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com <mailto:lersek@redhat.com> >
---
MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10
+++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git
a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644
--- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
+++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c
@@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock (
EFI_STATUS Status;
VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy;
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away
soon!\n", __FUNCTION__));
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use
Variable Policy!\n"));
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n",
VendorGuid, VariableName));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away
soon!\n", __FUNCTION__));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use
Variable Policy!\n"));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n",
VendorGuid, VariableName));
NewPolicy = NULL;
Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy(
@@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock (
//
// If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the
// current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If
it's
- // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so
the
+ // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so
the
// duplicate lock can be removed.
//
if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) {
Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL);
if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) {
- DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n",
VendorGuid, VariableName));
+ DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n",
VendorGuid, VariableName));
Status = EFI_SUCCESS;
} else {
DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n",
VendorGuid, VariableName));
--
2.19.1.3.g30247aa5d201
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#75452): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75452
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/83000411/1787277
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On 05/22/21 03:23, gaoliming wrote: > Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> > > > > I am ok to merge this patch for stable tag 202105. Thanks, Liming! Laszlo > > > > Thanks > > Liming > > 发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> 代表 Bret Barkelew via > groups.io > 发送时间: 2021年5月22日 4:43 > 收件人: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; edk2-devel-groups-io > <devel@edk2.groups.io> > 抄送: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>; > Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > 主题: Re: [edk2-devel] [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] > MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN > > > > Reviewed-by: Bret Barkelew bret.barkelew@microsoft.com > <mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> > > > > I don’t regret making it ERROR at first because now no one can claim to > have not been warned when the interface drops, but I agree that lowering to > WARN now is prudent. > > > > - Bret > > > > From: Laszlo Ersek <mailto:lersek@redhat.com> > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 1:40 PM > To: edk2-devel-groups-io <mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io> > Cc: Bret Barkelew <mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com> ; Hao A Wu > <mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com> ; Jian J Wang <mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com> ; > Liming Gao <mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> ; Kinney, Michael D > <mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com> ; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > <mailto:philmd@redhat.com> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: > downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN > > > > Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable > Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of > debug messages that: > > (a) are relevant for developers, > > (b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality > suffers in practice. > > Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first > is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the > double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status > EFI_SUCCESS). > > Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most > serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries > both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such > platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users, > as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do -- > in practice, nothing malfunctions. > > (Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D > DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".) > > Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com > <mailto:bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> > > Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com <mailto:hao.a.wu@intel.com> > > Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com <mailto:jian.j.wang@intel.com> > > Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn <mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> > > Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com > <mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com> > > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com <mailto:philmd@redhat.com> > > Ref: > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.t > ianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3410 <https://nam06.safelinks.protection. > outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D > 3410&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f06 > 08d91c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812 > %7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWw > iLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2 > FU%3D&reserved=0> > &data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f0608d9 > 1c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812%7CU > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ > XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2FU%3 > D&reserved=0 > Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021 > Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com <mailto:lersek@redhat.com> > > --- > MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 > +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git > a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644 > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > EFI_STATUS Status; > VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy; > > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away > soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use > Variable Policy!\n")); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away > soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use > Variable Policy!\n")); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > > NewPolicy = NULL; > Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy( > @@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > // > // If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the > // current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If > it's > - // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so > the > + // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so > the > // duplicate lock can be removed. > // > if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) { > Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL); > if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) { > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > Status = EFI_SUCCESS; > } else { > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#75459): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75459 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/83000411/1787277 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
On 05/21/21 22:40, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable > Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of > debug messages that: > > (a) are relevant for developers, > > (b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality > suffers in practice. > > Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first > is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the > double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status > EFI_SUCCESS). > > Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most > serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries > both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such > platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users, > as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do -- > in practice, nothing malfunctions. > > (Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D > DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".) > > Cc: Bret Barkelew <bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> > Cc: Hao A Wu <hao.a.wu@intel.com> > Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com> > Cc: Liming Gao <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn> > Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com> > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > Ref: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3410 > Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021 > Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> > --- > MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644 > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > EFI_STATUS Status; > VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy; > > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use Variable Policy!\n")); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > > NewPolicy = NULL; > Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy( > @@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > // > // If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the > // current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If it's > - // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so the > + // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so the > // duplicate lock can be removed. > // > if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) { > Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL); > if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) { > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > Status = EFI_SUCCESS; > } else { > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", VendorGuid, VariableName)); > Merged as commit cfa6ffb113f2, via <https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1661>. Thanks! Laszlo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#75466): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/75466 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/82995877/1787277 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [importer@patchew.org] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.