[SQUASH ON REBASE] Move inline comments to separate lines for tools_def

[kuqin12]

Description

The existing change somehow will make the PP_FLAGS have # MU_CHANGE embedded, causing the build to fail:

"PP_FLAGS" : -E -x assembler-with-cpp -include AutoGen.h # MU_CHANGE -I

This change removed applicable inline comments. But the real change should probably come from the parser.

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

How This Was Tested

This change was tested on the failing system and this fixed it.

Integration Instructions

N/A

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 1.59%. Comparing base (0ba6a3d) to head (2b71c06).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           dev/202405    #1190   +/-   ##
===========================================
  Coverage        1.59%    1.59%           
===========================================
  Files            1448     1448           
  Lines          362501   362501           
  Branches         5632     5632           
===========================================
  Hits             5776     5776           
  Misses         356618   356618           
  Partials          107      107           

Flag	Coverage Δ
MdeModulePkg	0.68% <ø> (ø)
MdePkg	5.42% <ø> (ø)
NetworkPkg	0.55% <ø> (ø)
PolicyServicePkg	30.41% <ø> (ø)
UefiCpuPkg	4.73% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[os-d]

Mark this as [SQUASH ON REBASE]?

[makubacki]

Mark this as [SQUASH ON REBASE]?

I think so. What is the plan for catching this in the future? The PR description mentions updating the parser. If that's what is going to be done is that tracked somewhere?

[kuqin12]

Mark this as [SQUASH ON REBASE]?

I think so. What is the plan for catching this in the future? The PR description mentions updating the parser. If that's what is going to be done is that tracked somewhere?

noup :) i was expecting someone to pick up that work. but i will create an issue before merging this.

[kuqin12]

Created #1193 to track the potential parser change.