From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f65.google.com (mail-wm1-f65.google.com [209.85.128.65]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.383.1574190115286798769 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:01:55 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=bYiKl1Du; spf=pass (domain: linaro.org, ip: 209.85.128.65, mailfrom: leif.lindholm@linaro.org) Received: by mail-wm1-f65.google.com with SMTP id l1so4405877wme.2 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:01:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=mKim9jQF09/JJ8w9ubTfi9HR1fLtW9wiFFDUjs4BKCw=; b=bYiKl1DuHoY2OT9o1zxl7fABxyQQ5MCxNYdBLsXpdPOni90QZht1Y+d6n8i2j4l6PG NrcP/fLJ4BjJwKcLjR8oSotzHUGEu9Vr/fEESOv+9+bKjywnbkPwmueltv6MbyrV5s1j VcvHYNDfyNeTXM7N/jZKFQfNmgvmxOPilVDI0lhSEJZXQfr8c0aDfrfVSMcspDueWX11 hUyb+foknNswyLh8WRTFMKMof9eSmCNJZYft2U6k2ljjMs/ed4MtOWJ8hG1ewTvCAlLA 0cjksfyV4Wm/QjKK2usgHQtBM7wRcorBe1yVaiBkovwBrzkypucaUzDZ4bOp97l/as0p y+Tw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=mKim9jQF09/JJ8w9ubTfi9HR1fLtW9wiFFDUjs4BKCw=; b=cqWed5EcBh+Jyh0n9pmBvXiq32L3NiftP+9le8EDb/ytaYonTYgSgVMS6MNYiTeoac fGOFOOgJL2OMmigwXnVNyBVitvrKZ67IzWSNPUUdmpJMh6CqRGMQ5WAAvp7au6TESFKP QhWPahOHFbwjNPI4OLV3xfN2Fy9gjK6zW2K8dnpg1Uo3WZLLTfzLXx/ItDvtgLt/CCy6 +gWoH0nqWtPd1NPam3RBi8AnRWHG2Y9447yAaqjhbnZhuS34qEl2/mRraTItNqYjrS3X KEU1ZTafr7ImtuEasFeRXxM7l1uE2Z6hWlnRpeCtWyJLlLVZvDqnjWFJ7SI2WHjN05Qu A+gA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXIqaYp6pfcl9zLIj5WM3IsRlNv+j4G3S61V86s4Q3BEkOLBURm 2TxkmjW8bdX/4zK2+Egj9jmBlw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzy7hnznSh+fVIT72d6foa4VoiKPPW2CyBQ1Gp6WxgPsdby3+ejE9m5vGb36diuqqfHfHzsTw== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2048:: with SMTP id g69mr7706315wmg.121.1574190113553; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:01:53 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from bivouac.eciton.net (bivouac.eciton.net. [2a00:1098:0:86:1000:23:0:2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 16sm4133489wmf.0.2019.11.19.11.01.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 19 Nov 2019 11:01:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:01:51 +0000 From: "Leif Lindholm" To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: "Gao, Liming" , "Kinney, Michael D" , "'afish@apple.com'" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" Subject: Re: Patch List for 201911 stable tag Message-ID: <20191119190151.GE7323@bivouac.eciton.net> References: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E5437BA@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <48a7f95e-1028-ea52-9980-da7af871cef2@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <48a7f95e-1028-ea52-9980-da7af871cef2@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 06:50:19PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 11/19/19 15:25, Gao, Liming wrote: > > Hi Stewards and all: > > I collect current patch lists in devel mail list. Those patch > > contributors request to add them for 201911 stable tag. Because the > > time is close to Hard Feature Freeze, I want to collect your > > feedback for below patches. > > > > Feature List (those all have pass code review): > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50602 [PATCH V2] BaseTools: Add [packages] section in dsc file > > This patch can be merged during the Soft Feature Freeze. It was posted > before the Soft Feature Freeze, and also reviewed (by Bob, i.e. a > BaseTools Maintainer) before the Soft Feature Freeze. > > As far as I can see, there is still an outstanding question from you, to > Zhiju ("Can you show what test are done for this new support?"), so I > think we should await the response to that. > > Note that the patch should not be merged once the Hard Feature Freeze > starts, so there are ~3 days for Zhiju to answer the question about > testing (and for you to acknowledge that you are OK with the reply). Agreed. > > Bug List (those all have pass code review): > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50625 [PATCH v1] MdeModulePkg/NvmExpressDxe: Fix wrong queue size for async IO queues > > Looks very much like a bugfix to me, so it's suitable for merging even > during the Hard Feature Freeze. I agree. But I am still slightly nervous about changing such a fundamental part of such a fundamental driver. Certainly if it is going in, I want it in ASAP, not just at the end of soft freeze - to give us as much time as possible to revert it if the fix exposes latent errors in previously working systems. > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50406 [PATCH 1/1] MdePkg/Include: Add missing definitions of SMBIOS type 42h in SmBios.h > > Based on Abner's response in the thread, this change does not appear > necessary for fixing actual functionality bugs; it rather completes a > previously incomplete feature addition. And Abner is not in a rush to > catch the upcoming stable tag with the patch. I suggest to delay it. > > If others disagree, I won't insist; the above is just my preference. I'm OK either way. > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50661 [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Update the coding styles > > Hmmm, quite undecided on this one. Does not fix a functionality bug > either, but what it fixes *are* a coding style bugs, and the patch is > low risk. I'm leaning towards merging it. I am against merging this, even though it's low-risk. The process says: "By the date of the soft feature freeze, developers must have sent their patches to the mailing list and received positive maintainer reviews (Reviewed-by or Acked-by tags)." This received Acks 4 days late. If it came with a commit message indicating the incorrect comment syntax caused problems with document generation, then maybe it could be considered from a bugfix standpoint. But it didn't and it's too late to re-scope the change at this point. I also dislike the mixing of doxygen formating changes and plain whitespace changes. Even though trivial, it ought to be split up. > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50662 [PATCH] MdePkg: Update the comments of IsLanguageSupported > > This was even reviewed by a package maintainer (= you) before the SFF, > so it can definitely go in. Agree (if cutting it close). > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50663 [PATCH 0/3] Add missing strings for uni files > > First of all, the structure of this series is wrong; please see my > feedback here: > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50666 > > (The two patches discussed just above were incorrectly included in the > same posting.) > > Second, the three patches for the UNI files add too much brand new text > for my taste, for them to be considered bugfixes. The patches were > posted in time for the SFF, but the maintainer reviews came too late: > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50872 > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50869 > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50870 > > I suggest postponing. Agree. > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50866 [PATCH V1 0/2] Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description > > I'm seriously confused by the subject prefixes in this patch thread. > What's going on with the version numbers? > > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V1 0/2] Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V3 1/2] MdeModulePkg PeiCore: Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V1 2/2] MdePkg PiPeiCis.h: Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description > > Other than that... I'm torn. I guess I could be convinced that these > patches are indeed bugfixes, so I'm leaning towards merging them. Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? I don't see why it should be considered. > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50841 [PATCH V2 1/1] MdeModulePkg PeiCore: Fix typos > > Personally I'm not happy about this patch. It's way too large for my taste: > > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain.inf | 10 ++-- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/FwVol/FwVol.h | 20 +++---- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain.h | 52 ++++++++-------- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Dependency/Dependency.c | 12 ++-- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Dispatcher/Dispatcher.c | 51 ++++++++-------- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/FwVol/FwVol.c | 63 ++++++++++---------- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Hob/Hob.c | 4 +- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Image/Image.c | 10 ++-- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Memory/MemoryServices.c | 18 +++--- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain/PeiMain.c | 2 +- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Ppi/Ppi.c | 4 +- > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Security/Security.c | 12 ++-- > 12 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 129 deletions(-) > > and it mixes multiple kinds of changes: > > "Fixes typos and clarifies some wording throughout PeiCore." > > When reviewing such a patch, the reviewer has a difficult time telling > apart purely syntactic (typo) fixes from semantic (wording) fixes. As a > reviewer I would suggest splitting this patch at least in two (typos vs. > semantics). Then I could be convinced such a set of two patches is > purely a bugfix. > > I'm leaning towards "postpone" on this one, but I can see why people > would think "that's arbitrary". I guess I'll have to defer to others in > this instance. Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? I don't see why it should be considered. I also agree on the needs splitting up bit. Best Regards, Leif