From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.7996.1621759727948812461 for ; Sun, 23 May 2021 01:48:48 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=Rz0NKPPw; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 216.205.24.124, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1621759727; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=C+uek4Ior7DgSllxq150m8vMvAnNZVucTRxbSQZgqGE=; b=Rz0NKPPwnxfDABGshxZvaQxzXkqNMgV//KT1I7WqU4Un3aCxEBrVfmxWdWaH91Gtc0xxVg UqKcQnf0wxc24QmapJ4ZdsvsE0oUYxZbdQKF9gt+UPmtMs9MiThlXXJV2UT8gryTl3SsQe YFyU99Aqvrzsnu1r5abDjh7Old45AiQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-313-2_fOZTW1NZiz4E9TuCsMcw-1; Sun, 23 May 2021 04:48:43 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 2_fOZTW1NZiz4E9TuCsMcw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E3CFFC82; Sun, 23 May 2021 08:48:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-112-8.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.8]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96EA35D74B; Sun, 23 May 2021 08:48:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IOWbnuWkjTogW2VkazItZGV2ZWxdIFtFWFRFUk5BTF0gW2VkazItc3RhYmxlMjAyMTA1IFBBVENIXSBNZGVNb2R1bGVQa2cvVmFyaWFibGVMb2NrOiBkb3duZ3JhZGUgY29tcGF0aWJpbGl0eSB3YXJuaW5ncyB0byBERUJVR19XQVJO?= To: devel@edk2.groups.io, gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, bret.barkelew@microsoft.com Cc: 'Hao A Wu' , 'Jian J Wang' , "'Kinney, Michael D'" , =?UTF-8?Q?'Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9'?= References: <20210521204037.11980-1-lersek@redhat.com> <00a401d74ea9$03f70980$0be51c80$@byosoft.com.cn> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: <34398aa5-e784-ded9-258c-6e013d7b4d27@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 10:48:39 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <00a401d74ea9$03f70980$0be51c80$@byosoft.com.cn> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=lersek@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gbk Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 05/22/21 03:23, gaoliming wrote: > Reviewed-by: Liming Gao > > > > I am ok to merge this patch for stable tag 202105. Thanks, Liming! Laszlo > > > > Thanks > > Liming > > 发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io 代表 Bret Barkelew via > groups.io > 发送时间: 2021年5月22日 4:43 > 收件人: Laszlo Ersek ; edk2-devel-groups-io > > 抄送: Hao A Wu ; Jian J Wang ; > Liming Gao ; Kinney, Michael D > ; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > 主题: Re: [edk2-devel] [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] > MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN > > > > Reviewed-by: Bret Barkelew bret.barkelew@microsoft.com > > > > > I don’t regret making it ERROR at first because now no one can claim to > have not been warned when the interface drops, but I agree that lowering to > WARN now is prudent. > > > > - Bret > > > > From: Laszlo Ersek > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 1:40 PM > To: edk2-devel-groups-io > Cc: Bret Barkelew ; Hao A Wu > ; Jian J Wang ; > Liming Gao ; Kinney, Michael D > ; Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [edk2-stable202105 PATCH] MdeModulePkg/VariableLock: > downgrade compatibility warnings to DEBUG_WARN > > > > Commit a18a9bde36d2 ("MdeModulePkg/Variable/RuntimeDxe: Restore Variable > Lock Protocol behavior", 2020-12-15), for bug 3111, added two such sets of > debug messages that: > > (a) are relevant for developers, > > (b) yet should not necessarily poke end-users, because no functionality > suffers in practice. > > Both message sets are in function VariableLockRequestToLock(): the first > is a generic interface deprecation warning; the second is the > double-locking situation, which we permit for compatibility (return status > EFI_SUCCESS). > > Both message sets should be emitted with the DEBUG_WARN mask, not the most > serious DEBUG_ERROR mask. On some platforms, the serial console carries > both terminal traffic, and grave (DEBUG_ERROR-only) log messages. On such > platforms, both message sets may be perceived as a nuisance by end-users, > as there is nothing they can do, and there's nothing they *should* do -- > in practice, nothing malfunctions. > > (Such a platform is ArmVirtQemu, built with "-D > DEBUG_PRINT_ERROR_LEVEL=0x80000000".) > > Cc: Bret Barkelew > > Cc: Hao A Wu > > Cc: Jian J Wang > > Cc: Liming Gao > > Cc: Michael D Kinney > > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > Ref: > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.t > ianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3410 outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D > 3410&data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f06 > 08d91c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812 > %7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWw > iLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2 > FU%3D&reserved=0> > &data=04%7C01%7Cbret.barkelew%40microsoft.com%7Ca7ff677adbc34cf62f0608d9 > 1c98b5b9%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637572264482965812%7CU > nknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ > XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2WuJ06k2ViIR6JnQVRmsGdsnYjmOrPUtGD82thYLe%2FU%3 > D&reserved=0 > Fixes: a18a9bde36d2ffc12df29cdced1efa1f8f9f2021 > Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek > > --- > MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c | 10 > +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git > a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > index 7d87e50efdcd..4e1efef9a7e4 100644 > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Universal/Variable/RuntimeDxe/VariableLockRequestToLock.c > @@ -48,9 +48,9 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > EFI_STATUS Status; > VARIABLE_POLICY_ENTRY *NewPolicy; > > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away > soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use > Variable Policy!\n")); > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! %a() will go away > soon!\n", __FUNCTION__)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Please move to use > Variable Policy!\n")); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, "!!! DEPRECATED INTERFACE !!! Variable: %g %s\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > > NewPolicy = NULL; > Status = CreateBasicVariablePolicy( > @@ -69,13 +69,13 @@ VariableLockRequestToLock ( > // > // If the error returned is EFI_ALREADY_STARTED, we need to check the > // current database for the variable and see whether it's locked. If > it's > - // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_ERROR message so > the > + // locked, we're still fine, but also generate a DEBUG_WARN message so > the > // duplicate lock can be removed. > // > if (Status == EFI_ALREADY_STARTED) { > Status = ValidateSetVariable (VariableName, VendorGuid, 0, 0, NULL); > if (Status == EFI_WRITE_PROTECTED) { > - DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > + DEBUG ((DEBUG_WARN, " Variable: %g %s is already locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); > Status = EFI_SUCCESS; > } else { > DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, " Variable: %g %s can not be locked!\n", > VendorGuid, VariableName)); >