From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39710) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fJKMS-0001wF-5x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2018 10:58:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fJKMO-0004D1-Bx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2018 10:58:32 -0400 Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com ([66.187.233.73]:44720 helo=mx1.redhat.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fJKMO-0004Ci-7p for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 May 2018 10:58:28 -0400 References: <20180515123007.10164-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <229d0059-2ab4-bf2d-cbf5-9dca4ff978bd@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 16:58:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [edk2] [PATCH 0/4] RFC: ovmf: Add support for TPM Physical Presence interface List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?Q?Marc-Andr=c3=a9_Lureau?= Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org, qemu-devel , javierm@redhat.com, pjones@redhat.com, jiewen.yao@intel.com On 05/17/18 16:43, Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrot= e: >> - the "xfuncname"-related settings, so that git diff hunk headers @@ >> are useful for DSC and INF files too, >> >=20 > This is already in my .git/config, I hope it takes it by default in > format-patch? You also need to classify files appropriately so that the xfuncname setting apply to them: https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/Laszlo's-unkempt-gi= t-guide-for-edk2-contributors-and-maintainers#contrib-09 >> Not much of a review, I know; this is all I can offer right now. If yo= u >> have the time to respin just with these superficial changes, that migh= t >> make my life easier. If you prefer to delay them, that's 100% fine too= . >> >=20 > I am going to resend with the style fixes. I managed to review your v1 in full earlier today, so I'd prefer to review your v3, with my more in-depth comments addressed as well. Thanks! Laszlo