From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.21240.1574326636651632129 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:57:16 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: intel.com, ip: 134.134.136.31, mailfrom: liming.gao@intel.com) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Nov 2019 00:57:16 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,224,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="259311738" Received: from fmsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.202]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Nov 2019 00:57:15 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx154.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.70) by fmsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:57:15 -0800 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by FMSMSX154.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.116.70) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:57:15 -0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.127]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.2]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 16:57:13 +0800 From: "Liming Gao" To: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "Gao, Liming" , "leif.lindholm@linaro.org" , Laszlo Ersek , "Kinney, Michael D" , "'afish@apple.com'" Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag Thread-Topic: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag Thread-Index: AdWes9zSqCOwyMXRRDqc08vU3NDaogACuPOAAAJ/j4AAOk7T0AAiFtWg Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:57:12 +0000 Message-ID: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E545983@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E5437BA@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <48a7f95e-1028-ea52-9980-da7af871cef2@redhat.com> <20191119190151.GE7323@bivouac.eciton.net> <15D8E68889A9A669.17632@groups.io> In-Reply-To: <15D8E68889A9A669.17632@groups.io> Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Return-Path: liming.gao@intel.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Stewards and all: New bugs are for 201911 stable tag. Can you give the comments for them? Bug List (those all have pass code review): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50931 [PATCH] MdeModulePkg: LzmaCus= tomDecompressLib.inf don't support EBC anymore https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50990 [PATCH V1 1/1] MdeModulePkg/V= ariable: Initialize local variable https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50989 [PATCH V2] BaseTools:fix regr= ession issue for platform .map file https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50936 [PATCH] BaseTools:fixed Build= failed issue for Non-English OS Thanks Liming >-----Original Message----- >From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of >Liming Gao >Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 10:52 PM >To: devel@edk2.groups.io; leif.lindholm@linaro.org; Laszlo Ersek > >Cc: Kinney, Michael D ; 'afish@apple.com' > >Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag > >Laszlo and Leif: > Thanks for your detail review. I will continue to monitor the coming ch= anges >for 201911 stable tag. > >Thanks >Liming >> -----Original Message----- >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Leif >Lindholm >> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 3:02 AM >> To: Laszlo Ersek >> Cc: Gao, Liming ; Kinney, Michael D >; 'afish@apple.com' ; >> devel@edk2.groups.io >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag >> >> 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 t= he >> > > 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 poste= d >> > 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 eve= n >> > 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 (=3D you) before the S= FF, >> > 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 th= e >> > same posting.) >> > >> > Second, the three patches for the UNI files add too much brand new te= xt >> > 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() descripti= on >> > [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 tellin= g >> > 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 >> >> > > >