Change IpmiBaseLibNull to BASE library type

[cfernald]

Description

The IpmiBaseLibNull implementation currently restricts its library types and consumes libraries that it does not use. This change cleans up and generalizes the NULL imlementation.

• Impacts functionality?
• Impacts security?
• Breaking change?
• Includes tests?
• Includes documentation?

How This Was Tested

Local build

Integration Instructions

N/A

[makubacki]

Main comment that I think should be resolved is adding the EFIAPI modifier since this is a public API it and should be a part of the cleanup.

[apop5]

https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/commits/master/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseIpmiLibNull

MdeModulePkg includes a BaseIpmiLibNull.

Our IpmiBaseLib is out of sync with the edk2 version. Would we benefit from removing our Base version and consuming the edk2 (and moving the GetBmcStatus into another Library instance contained in mu_feature_ipmi?

At some point we will want to reconcile the two implementations, right? It may not matter for this PR, but it could help us reduce the debt we are accruing.

[cfernald]

https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/commits/master/MdeModulePkg/Library/BaseIpmiLibNull

MdeModulePkg includes a BaseIpmiLibNull.

Our IpmiBaseLib is out of sync with the edk2 version. Would we benefit from removing our Base version and consuming the edk2 (and moving the GetBmcStatus into another Library instance contained in mu_feature_ipmi?

At some point we will want to reconcile the two implementations, right? It may not matter for this PR, but it could help us reduce the debt we are accruing.

I think this is fair. I'll co ahead and complete this PR and plan to make this swap. Generally, I dont think anyone is calling GetBmcStatus through the base lib and it's a rare enough operation I'm fine just not having it in the abstractions.