Removing rules for Ipf sources file:
* Remove the source file which path with "ipf" and also listed in
[Sources.IPF] section of INF file.
* Remove the source file which listed in [Components.IPF] section
of DSC file and not listed in any other [Components] section.
* Remove the embedded Ipf code for MDE_CPU_IPF.
Removing rules for Inf file:
* Remove IPF from VALID_ARCHITECTURES comments.
* Remove DXE_SAL_DRIVER from LIBRARY_CLASS in [Defines] section.
* Remove the INF which only listed in [Components.IPF] section in DSC.
* Remove statements from [BuildOptions] that provide IPF specific flags.
* Remove any IPF sepcific sections.
Removing rules for Dec file:
* Remove [Includes.IPF] section from Dec.
Removing rules for Dsc file:
* Remove IPF from SUPPORTED_ARCHITECTURES in [Defines] section of DSC.
* Remove any IPF specific sections.
* Remove statements from [BuildOptions] that provide IPF specific flags.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Chen A Chen <chen.a.chen@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
1. Do not use tab characters
2. No trailing white space in one line
3. All files must end with CRLF
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
According to UEFI spec, the RouteConfig protocol function should populate
the Progress pointer with an address inside Configuration. This patch
ensures that these functions are compliant when EFI_NOT_FOUND is returned.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Thomas Palmer <thomas.palmer@hpe.com>
Reviewed-by: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
mLegacyBootOptionPrivate pointer is initialized in Constructor function
with if condition check, but it's used in Destructor function directly
without any check. Now add the NULL pointer check.
Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
The LegacyBootMaintUiLib depends on the LegacyBootManagerLib to realize its
functionality, the LegacyBootManagerLib may initialize after
LegacyBootMaintUiLib, so the functionality of LegacyBootMaintUiLib may
be incorrect. Now we fix this issue by executing the related codes when
opening the legacy forminstead in its the constructor function. Because
when opening the legacy form, the LegacyBootManagerLib must have been
initialized.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Remove the ASSERT code that may be triggered in LegacyBootMaintUiLib.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Dandan Bi <dandan.bi@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
