currently GUID packing and pack size determination is spread
throughout the code. This introduces a shared function and dict and
routes all code paths through them.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
the function is only used in one other function.
just move it there.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
change methods which do not use self to @staticmethod
change their calls to use class name instead of instance
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
this serves no purpose since we dont change the global or assign to it.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
add the API root in one class file.
delete the static API out of both classes.
share it in the single location.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
change methods which do not use self to @staticmethod
change their calls to use class name instead of instance
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
make this function @staticmethod since self parameter is not used.
change valuelist to valuedict since it is a dictionary.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
PCD size by type is shared so this change both removes duplication
and makes the function work for all numeric PCD types.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
inherently python will check string and list for None and having data
if <x> in [None, ''] and similar are superflous.
Cc: Liming Gao <liming.gao@intel.com>
Cc: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Jaben Carsey <jaben.carsey@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Yonghong Zhu <yonghong.zhu@intel.com>
