From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.byosoft.com.cn (mail.byosoft.com.cn [58.240.74.243]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.11316.1598445177165681697 for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 05:33:00 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=none, err=permanent DNS error (domain: byosoft.com.cn, ip: 58.240.74.243, mailfrom: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn) Received: from DESKTOPS6D0PVI ([116.233.155.155]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.168.6.13 with ESMTP for ; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 20:32:44 +0800 X-WM-Sender: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn X-WM-AuthFlag: YES X-WM-AuthUser: gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn From: "gaoliming" To: , , "'Laszlo Ersek'" , "'Leif Lindholm'" , , "'Kinney, Michael D'" , "'Guptha, Soumya K'" Cc: , "'Chang, Abner \(HPS SW/FW Technologist\)'" , "'Zhang, Qi1'" , References: <001501d679b8$bdb3aa20$391afe60$@byosoft.com.cn> <5140ca34-9534-8873-8fbb-e07a9132d53d@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: =?UTF-8?B?5Zue5aSNOiBbZWRrMi1kZXZlbF0gU29mdCBGZWF0dXJlIEZyZWV6ZSBzdGFydCBkYXRlIGRlbGF5cyB0byAyMDIwLTA4LTI0IGZvciBlZGsyLXN0YWJsZTIwMjAwOA==?= Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 20:32:36 +0800 Message-ID: <000a01d67ba5$00b9b880$022d2980$@byosoft.com.cn> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQGXE5F6mQ9CB4FUC8X7cKMdJF2b1AHA4CCGAlnQp0QCLfwGcgHQlKF1qYhU+SA= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: zh-cn Jiewen: For this patch set V3, I see you give reviewed-by on Aug 15th https://edk2= .groups.io/g/devel/message/64299=20 For V4, https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/64354, it makes the change = per your comment.=20 So, I agree you as SecurityPkg maintainter reviewed-by is OK for V4 patch = set.=20 And, I also see Chiu, Chasel as IntelFsp2WrapperPkg maintainer gives revie= wed-by on Aug 18th for the changes in IntelFsp2WrapperPkg So, I think the latest patch set V4 finished code review before new SFF st= art date (2020-08-24).=20 Based on SFF definition, I agree this patch set can be merged for this sta= ble tag 202008.=20 Thanks Liming > -----=E9=82=AE=E4=BB=B6=E5=8E=9F=E4=BB=B6----- > =E5=8F=91=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: bounce+27952+64638+4905953+8761045@groups.i= o > =E4=BB=A3=E8=A1=A8 Yao, J= iewen > =E5=8F=91=E9=80=81=E6=97=B6=E9=97=B4: 2020=E5=B9=B48=E6=9C=8826=E6=97=A5= 18:17 > =E6=94=B6=E4=BB=B6=E4=BA=BA: Laszlo Ersek ; devel@edk= 2.groups.io; gaoliming > ; 'Leif Lindholm' ; > afish@apple.com; Kinney, Michael D ; Guptha, > Soumya K > =E6=8A=84=E9=80=81: announce@edk2.groups.io; 'Chang, Abner (HPS SW/FW Te= chnologist)' > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; > marcello.bauer@9elements.com > =E4=B8=BB=E9=A2=98: Re: [edk2-devel] Soft Feature Freeze start date dela= ys to 2020-08-24 for > edk2-stable202008 >=20 > HI Laszlo > I checked the history. >=20 > Jiewen replied " [PATCH v3 0/8] Need add a FSP binary measurement" with > review-by on V3 patch series in August 15, with comment to rename > FvEventLogRecordLib to TcgEventLogRecordLib. > Qi sent v4 series in August 17, with only naming change from > FvEventLogRecordLib to TcgEventLogRecordLib. > Jian replied "[PATCH v3 0/8] Need add a FSP binary measurement" with > reviewed-by on V3 patch series in August 18. >=20 > So I treat this patch series is qualified to check in (since V4 adopted = my > comment). But please let me know if there is any misunderstanding. >=20 >=20 > When I am about to merge, I am told that we are in SFF and I cannot chec= k in. > According to the plan, I will check in after August 28, which is end of = August. It > is still OK for me. > 2020-08-14 Soft Feature Freeze > 2020-08-21 Hard Feature Freeze > 2020-08-28 Release >=20 > But now, if we need delay one week, then the final release data will be > September. If I cannot check in now, I will have to check in at Septembe= r. > That is why I said, it impacts me, because of this one week delay. >=20 > Thank you > Yao Jiewen >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Laszlo Ersek > > Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 5:54 PM > > To: Yao, Jiewen ; devel@edk2.groups.io; gaolimin= g > > ; 'Leif Lindholm' ; > > afish@apple.com; Kinney, Michael D ; > Guptha, > > Soumya K > > Cc: announce@edk2.groups.io; 'Chang, Abner (HPS SW/FW Technologist)' > > ; Zhang, Qi1 ; > > marcello.bauer@9elements.com > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Soft Feature Freeze start date delays to > 2020-08-24 for > > edk2-stable202008 > > > > Hi Jiewen, > > > > On 08/26/20 03:19, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > To clarify below: > > > I just notice this one week delay. It impacts us. > > > > > >> https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/64354 > > >> [PATCH v4 0/8] Need add a FSP binary measurement > > > > > > The SecurityPkg patches have not been approved yet, and Bret and > > > Jiewen are still testing / discussing (as far as I understand): > > > . Material for the nex= t > > > tag. > > > > > > [Jiewen] I think the security pkg is already approved by me and Jian > > > (SecurityPkg maintainer) Bret also provides feedback that it looks > > > good. > > > > The series in question has three SecurityPkg patches: > > > > [PATCH v4 1/8] SecurityPkg/TcgEventLogRecordLib: add new lib for > firmware > > measurement > > [PATCH v4 5/8] SecurityPkg/dsc: add FvEventLogRecordLib > > [PATCH v4 7/8] SecurityPkg/Tcg2: handle PRE HASH and LOG ONLY > > > > As I'm writing this, *none* of the listed patches have any kind of > > Reviewed-by or Acked-by, either included in the patches themselves, or > > posted in response to them. > > > > > I request to check in to stable202008, if possible. > > > > We can do that only if (a) we extend the SFF deadline again, and (b) > > each of the SecurityPkg patches receives at least an Acked-by from one > > of the SecurityPkg maintainers, until the new deadline. > > > > I'm certainly not against the idea. I don't mind if the release slips > > some more; it's OK to say that we're not ready to release yet. The poi= nt > > is, as long as we're doing more work for completing the release, we > > should prolong the stabilization period as well (opportunity for peopl= e > > to test). > > > > Thanks, > > Laszlo >=20 >=20 >=20