public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
To: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>
Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/2] Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:38:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2e083f9d-4009-dd3e-c845-108f0c1eb24a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171121061725.11028-1-jian.j.wang@intel.com>

Jian,

On 11/21/17 07:17, Jian J Wang wrote:
>> v7:
>>   Merge memory map after filtering paging attributes
> 
> More than one entry of RT_CODE memory might cause boot problem for some
> old OSs. This patch will fix this issue to keep OS compatibility as much
> as possible.
> 
> Jian J Wang (2):
>   MdeModulePkg/DxeCore: Filter out all paging capabilities
>   UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map
> 
>  MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/DxeMain.h              | 18 ++++++
>  MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Mem/Page.c             | 21 +++++++
>  MdeModulePkg/Core/Dxe/Misc/PropertiesTable.c |  1 -
>  UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe/CpuPageTable.c             | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  4 files changed, 112 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> 

I don't have capacity to retest and re-review the series.

Considering the following two options, I like none of them:

(1) Version 7 is merged with my feedback tags from v6. I don't like this
because I didn't review or test version 7.

(2) Version 7 is merged without my feedback tags. I don't like this
because I've put a lot of BZ writeup, and patch review and testing
effort for this series, and I'd like the commit log to reflect that.


Instead, I would like to request the following, for v8:

Please submit a series that consists of three patches:

- patch v8 1/3: identical to v6 1/2, except for the code comment update,
- patch v8 2/3: identical to v6 2/2,
- patch v8 3/3: please implement the merging of the memory map as a
separate patch.

Patches v8 1/3 and 2/3 should include *both* my Tested-by *and* my
Reviewed-by tags, from v6.

Patch v8 3/3 should be reviewed / tested separately by others. I don't
think I can find the capacity for that at the moment.

This approach will correctly reflect all the work done thus far, and it
will provide the desired result for the code as well.

Thanks
Laszlo


  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-11-21 13:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-21  6:17 [PATCH v7 0/2] Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map Jian J Wang
2017-11-21  6:17 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] MdeModulePkg/DxeCore: Filter out all paging capabilities Jian J Wang
2017-11-21  7:31   ` Zeng, Star
2017-11-21  6:17 ` [PATCH v7 2/2] UefiCpuPkg/CpuDxe: Fix multiple entries of RT_CODE in memory map Jian J Wang
2017-11-21 13:38 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
2017-11-22  7:56   ` [PATCH v7 0/2] " Zeng, Star
2017-11-22  7:57     ` Yao, Jiewen
2017-11-22  9:05     ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-11-22  9:09       ` Wang, Jian J
2017-11-22  9:07   ` Wang, Jian J

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2e083f9d-4009-dd3e-c845-108f0c1eb24a@redhat.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox