From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: intel.com, ip: 192.55.52.151, mailfrom: liming.gao@intel.com) Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by groups.io with SMTP; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 06:26:47 -0700 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Jun 2019 06:26:47 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,366,1557212400"; d="scan'208,217";a="184247070" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Jun 2019 06:26:47 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx112.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.6) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 06:26:47 -0700 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.69) by FMSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 06:26:46 -0700 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.185]) by SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.83]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 21:26:45 +0800 From: "Liming Gao" To: "Oram, Isaac W" , "Yao, Jiewen" , "Dong, Eric" , "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "Kinney, Michael D" CC: "Gao, Liming" Subject: Re: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel directory] Thread-Topic: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel directory] Thread-Index: AdUXgumLnb/EiamOTkmGImOkr7H9TwAAkBVg//992oD//3mQUIAEvqwA//94s2CAAI4igP//d0GwAFMp+4D/8pYIgA== Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 13:26:44 +0000 Message-ID: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E47DC8E@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503F67FA7A@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503F67FB10@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503F686731@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <74D8A39837DF1E4DA445A8C0B3885C503F6867EA@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <3155A53C14BABF45A364D10949B7414C970FE0D0@ORSMSX116.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3155A53C14BABF45A364D10949B7414C970FE0D0@ORSMSX116.amr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNGU3OTM4MmEtMjYxMC00YTVhLTg1NzMtZGY5NDIzMDU4YWU4IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoidVpCNDgxQk9xQXhJT3hmT3MzbUpobnVHa3NaK3l3Nk1lSkJJdnN5SlR3ZVFHbm1ueVFIUDlcL2tVOUZDT05rMkkifQ== dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.0.600.7 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Return-Path: liming.gao@intel.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E47DC8ESHSMSX104ccrcor_" --_000_4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E47DC8ESHSMSX104ccrcor_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Isaac and Eric: Here is the proposal for new packages in Platform\Intel directory. BoardModulePkg: This package includes the libraries shared between the diff= erent board packages. Those libraries are linked by the drivers in the boar= d packages. DebugFeaturePkg: This package provides the debug features, such as debug li= brary, debug method. ManageabilityFeaturePkg: This package provides the system management driver= , such as Ipmi, Smbios. DeviceFeaturePkg: This package provides the different device support, such = as SIO controller, Network. UserInterfaceFeaturePkg: This package provides UI related modules, such as = Logo, Setup page. Thanks Liming From: Oram, Isaac W Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 4:25 PM To: Yao, Jiewen ; Dong, Eric ; d= evel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming ; Kinney, Michael D = Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Eric, I have envisioned less granular packages for advanced features. One of the= goals for MinPlatform is to improve usability during porting. The idea is= that you would do basic board porting with minimal effort to get your syst= em functional. Then you would enable additional features by adding collect= ions of features to your baseline. Then as a last step optimize out unnece= ssary things. This is something like a functionality oriented porting appr= oach. Get all the functionality you need by building up, then optimize out= . I would characterize Intel's traditional reference platforms as having e= verything and then adding and removing from a starting point that was very = feature rich. The challenge we seemed to face was that it was hard to remo= ve things with the feature rich starting point. As an example of functionality oriented porting, say that I set up my basic= server port by starting with the Purley open board package. I port it to = my motherboard, then I check out my baseline functionality. Then I add man= ageability features by including DSC/FDF from the ManageabilityFeaturePkg t= hat add FV to my MinPlatform port. And I repeat for other sets of features= until I get all of the features that I need. Then I optimize: for size, s= peed, to reduce complexity, and so on. It would be best if this optimizati= on were tool assisted to a great degree, e.g a more sophisticated FMMT that= lets one cut out extra components. My concern is that if we allow very specific feature packages, like the Use= rAuthenticationPkg, we are very much like today. Yes, you can select any d= rivers you need and add to your DSC/FDF. But that is very quickly overwhel= ming. There are hundreds of drivers and what they require is often complex= to determine. Thus we tend to copy something else and customize it. This= tends to lead to lots of technical debt and complexity. I am thinking that we should target something like 10-20 advanced feature p= ackages that produce one or two (if features have pre-memory components) FV= with a set of features and simpler dependencies. We are just in the early= stages of defining what this would look like, and our thinking is evolving= . We have identified Manageability and Debug as feature collections. I th= ink that there is one for adding USB, network, Bluetooth and such periphera= l support. I think setup browser and UI stuff will go somewhere. We can m= ine a few reference platforms for data. Let's discuss this in person and make a proposal for organization for featu= re packages and the rules for what goes where. We can add this proposal to= your RFC and I think that will help guide the future development of the Pl= atform\Intel contents. Regards, Isaac From: Yao, Jiewen Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 9:03 AM To: Dong, Eric >; devel@edk= 2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Since there is no other module, I think we can use this specific package na= me to tell people what it is. It is also good for feature isolation. Thank you Yao Jiewen From: Dong, Eric Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:53 AM To: Yao, Jiewen >; devel@= edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Hi Jiewen, So far, I don't have other modules which need to move to this package. I think UserAuthenticationPkg is too specific, but if others also agree wit= h this name, I'm ok too. Hi liming, Isaac & Mike, Any comments about the new package name? Thanks, Eric From: Yao, Jiewen Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:35 AM To: Dong, Eric >; devel@edk= 2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Cc: Yao, Jiewen > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] OK. Do you have any other modules what could be potentially in this package= ? I think another option is to name it UserAuthenticationPkg, just like Signe= dCapsulePkg. Thank you Yao Jiewen From: Dong, Eric Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:28 AM To: Yao, Jiewen >; devel@= edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] I think sample means this is an example about how to enable this feature. C= ode implemented with production quality. Platform can decide whether to use= it or not. Thanks, Eric From: Yao, Jiewen Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 4:06 PM To: Dong, Eric >; devel@edk= 2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Would you please clarify what "sample" here really means? Not for productio= n? Or something else? Thank you Yao Jiewen From: Dong, Eric Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 4:02 PM To: Yao, Jiewen >; devel@= edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Hi Jiewen, I think SecuritySamplePkg used to save 1) sample implementation for securit= y related features, 2) it's platform scope feature. SecurityPkg used to save 1) common security features, 2) It's not a sample = implementation. This is just my proposal, If you have better one, you can raise here. Thanks, Eric From: Yao, Jiewen Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 3:49 PM To: Dong, Eric >; devel@edk= 2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D > Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel direct= ory] Would you please clarify the position of SecuritySamplePkg ? What is the difference between SecurityPkg and SecuritySamplePkg ? Thank you Yao Jiewen From: Dong, Eric Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 3:46 PM To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming >; Kubacki, Michael A >; Oram, Isaac W >; Kinney, Michael D >; Yao, Jiewen > Subject: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel directory] Isaac, Jiewen & Mike, I plan to add a new driver named UserAuthentication. This driver shows a sa= mple implementation about how to control user enter setup page. I plan to a= dd a new package in Platform\Intel folder to save this driver. New package = name is SecuritySamplePkg. Any comments for this RFC? Thanks, Eric _._,_._,_ --_000_4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E47DC8ESHSMSX104ccrcor_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Isaac and Eric:

  Here is the proposal for new packages in Platform\Intel di= rectory.

 

BoardModulePkg: This package includes the libraries shared betwee= n the different board packages. Those libraries are linked by the drivers i= n the board packages.

DebugFeaturePkg: This package provides the debug features, such a= s debug library, debug method.

ManageabilityFeaturePkg: This package provides the system managem= ent driver, such as Ipmi, Smbios.

DeviceFeaturePkg: This package provides the different device supp= ort, such as SIO controller, Network.

UserInterfaceFeaturePkg: This package provides UI related modules= , such as Logo, Setup page.

 

Thanks

Liming

From: Oram, Isaac W
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 4:25 PM
To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Dong, Eric <eric.do= ng@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.co= m>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Eric,

 

I have envisioned less granular= packages for advanced features.  One of the goals for MinPlatform is = to improve usability during porting.  The idea is that you would do ba= sic board porting with minimal effort to get your system functional.  Then you would enable additional features by addi= ng collections of features to your baseline.  Then as a last step opti= mize out unnecessary things.  This is something like a functionality o= riented porting approach.  Get all the functionality you need by building up, then optimize out.  I would characterize Int= el’s traditional reference platforms as having everything and then ad= ding and removing from a starting point that was very feature rich.  T= he challenge we seemed to face was that it was hard to remove things with the feature rich starting point.

 

As an example of functionality = oriented porting, say that I set up my basic server port by starting with t= he Purley open board package.  I port it to my motherboard, then I che= ck out my baseline functionality.  Then I add manageability features by including DSC/FDF from the ManageabilityFeat= urePkg that add FV to my MinPlatform port.  And I repeat for other set= s of features until I get all of the features that I need.  Then I opt= imize: for size, speed, to reduce complexity, and so on.  It would be best if this optimization were tool assisted = to a great degree, e.g a more sophisticated FMMT that lets one cut out extr= a components.

 

My concern is that if we allow = very specific feature packages, like the UserAuthenticationPkg, we are very= much like today.  Yes, you can select any drivers you need and add to= your DSC/FDF.  But that is very quickly overwhelming.  There are hundreds of drivers and what they require is= often complex to determine.  Thus we tend to copy something else and = customize it.  This tends to lead to lots of technical debt and comple= xity.

 

I am thinking that we should ta= rget something like 10-20 advanced feature packages that produce one or two= (if features have pre-memory components) FV with a set of features and sim= pler dependencies.  We are just in the early stages of defining what this would look like, and our thinking is ev= olving.  We have identified Manageability and Debug as feature collect= ions.  I think that there is one for adding USB, network, Bluetooth an= d such peripheral support.  I think setup browser and UI stuff will go somewhere.  We can mine a few reference = platforms for data.

 

Let’s discuss this in per= son and make a proposal for organization for feature packages and the rules= for what goes where.  We can add this proposal to your RFC and I thin= k that will help guide the future development of the Platform\Intel contents.

 

Regards,

Isaac

 

 

From: Yao, Jiewen
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 9:03 AM
To: Dong, Eric <eric.dong@= intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Since there is no other module, I think we can use this specific = package name to tell people what it is.

It is also good for feature isolation.

 

Thank you

Yao Jiewen

 

From: Dong, Eric
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:53 AM
To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.y= ao@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Hi Jiew= en,

&n= bsp;

So far,= I don’t have other modules which need to move to this package.<= /o:p>

&n= bsp;

I think= Us= erAuthenticationPkg is too specific, bu= t if others also agree with this name, I’m ok too.=

 

&n= bsp;

Hi limi= ng, Isaac & Mike,

&n= bsp;

Any com= ments about the new package name?

&n= bsp;

Thanks,=

Eric

From: Yao, Jiewen
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:35 AM
To: Dong, Eric <eric.dong@= intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Cc: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.y= ao@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

OK. Do you have any other modules what could be potentially in th= is package?

 

I think another option is to name it UserAuthenticationPkg, just like SignedCapsulePkg.=

 

Thank you

Yao Jiewen

 

From: Dong, Eric
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 8:28 AM
To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.y= ao@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

I think= sample means this is an example about how to enable this feature. Code imp= lemented with production quality. Platform can decide whether to use it or = not.

&n= bsp;

Thanks,=

Eric

From: Yao, Jiewen
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 4:06 PM
To: Dong, Eric <eric.dong@= intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Would you please clarify what “sample” here really me= ans? Not for production? Or something else?

 

Thank you

Yao Jiewen

 

 

From: Dong, Eric
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 4:02 PM
To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.y= ao@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Hi Jiew= en,

&n= bsp;

I think= SecuritySamplePkg used to save 1) sample implementation for security relat= ed features, 2) it’s platform scope feature.

Securit= yPkg used to save 1) common security features, 2) It’s not a sample i= mplementation.

&n= bsp;

This is= just my proposal, If you have better one, you can raise here.

&n= bsp;

Thanks,=

Eric

From: Yao, Jiewen
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 3:49 PM
To: Dong, Eric <eric.dong@= intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Limi= ng <liming.gao@intel.com>= ; Kubacki, Michael A <mic= hael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michae= l.d.kinney@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel= directory]

 

Would you please clarify the position of SecuritySamplePkg ?

&n= bsp;

What is= the difference between SecurityPkg and SecuritySamplePkg ?

 

Thank you

Yao Jiewen

 

From: Dong, Eric
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 3:46 PM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io= ; Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.= com>; Kubacki, Michael A <michael.a.kubacki@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.c= om>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
Subject: [RFC][edk2-platform][Add new packages in Platform\Intel dir= ectory]

 

Isaac, = Jiewen & Mike,

 

I plan = to add a new driver named UserAuthentication. This driver shows a sample im= plementation about how to control user enter setup page. I plan to add a ne= w package in Platform\Intel folder to save this driver. New package name is SecuritySamplePkg. Any comments for = this RFC?

&n= bsp;

Thanks,=

Eric

_._,_._,_<= /span>

--_000_4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E47DC8ESHSMSX104ccrcor_--