[edk2-devel] Progress on getting Uncrustify working for EDK2?

[Michael D Kinney]

Leif,

Comments below.

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel at edk2.groups.io <devel at edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif Lindholm
> Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 12:56 PM
> To: devel at edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney at intel.com>
> Cc: Marvin Häuser <mhaeuser at posteo.de>; Andrew Fish <afish at apple.com>; Michael Kubacki <Michael.Kubacki at microsoft.com>;
> mikuback at linux.microsoft.com; rebecca at nuviainc.com; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew at microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Progress on getting Uncrustify working for EDK2?
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 16:33:31 +0000, Michael D Kinney wrote:
> > > >> 1. If virtually everyone will need Uncrustify, why cannot it be built along with BaseTools from a submodule?
> Especially
> > > >> with the fork that makes sense, after that it depends on the upstream (it does not look too nice to me).
> > > > No matter where uncrustify sources are hosted, developers can always choose to build the uncrustify tool locally.
> > > > Providing release binaries for the tool may be simpler for some customers.
> > > > Using release binaries from EDK II CI agents will reduce CI execution time.
> > >
> > > My point was it'd be nice if it (optionally) "just worked", so
> > > Uncrustify could be be built as part of the edk2 BaseTools build
> > > process, or release binaries could be downloaded by some script, or
> > > whatever really. I guess it could be the same logic as for the CI?
> >
> > Setting up a development work environment also requires the installation of tools such as
> > compilers, NASM, IASL, etc.  These are not handled as part of BaseTools today.
> 
> No, but users are not required to install a specific, not-yet-upstream
> version of a tool. This is the fundamental problem here.
> 
> Once the edk2 support is available in upstream uncrustify, there is a
> substantial lag in how the updated version trickles down through
> packaging systems.

There is an RFC with no negative feedback to move to NASM 2.15.05.

I do not believe that is the version supported in all the distros
packaging systems yet.

So I expect there will likely be many windows of time where the 
EDK II projects have a dependency on a tool in that state.

If this was a significant concern, why was it not raised with the
NASM 2.15.05?

> 
> > Supporting this indent style is one of the enhancements in the fork.  If we want to align
> > to one of the indent styles supported by a wider array of source editors/IDEs, then that
> > would require a change to the EDK II Coding Style Specification and approval from the
> > EDK II community.
> 
> Yes. The above problem of getting the tool at the appropriate version
> is why I previously stated my preference as being to change to coding
> style so it matched what was already supported in upstream uncrustify.

Stating a preference without specific details on the exact style that is
actionable by developers and verifiable does not help close on this topic.

Can you provide the specific details and update the BZs provided in an
earlier version of this thread:

	https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/81609

If you are not able to provide details, but are rejecting this proposal all
together, then please be clear that you are rejecting the proposal so those
that are working on it can move on to other priorities.

> 
> Adding a version of the tool as a submodule of BaseTools would be  a
> mitigation for the 5-year window introduced by *depending* on
> not-yet-upstream support in a commonly used tool.
> 
> > > 6) Allow static function declarations.
> >
> > I agree that static functions should be allowed.  Please add any comments you have to
> > the following Bugzilla.  If you have ideas on the specific spec updates required, then
> > please provide a patch against the spec markdown.
> >
> >     https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1766
> 
> I think that's a different issue, but otherwise agreed.
> 
> /
>     Leif
> 
> 
> 
> 



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#83527): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/83527
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/84932137/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-