From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124])
 by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.127466.1680694765688026232
 for <devel@edk2.groups.io>;
 Wed, 05 Apr 2023 04:39:25 -0700
Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io;
 dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=VJ1aiM7A;
 spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 170.10.129.124, mailfrom: kraxel@redhat.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1680694764;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=+MmiV7edmjVEfCj6cDhOXVw35JlgeU00KjgnetZMnpw=;
	b=VJ1aiM7AOOCfWcvvocCElG4bYkl4gn0Nic8xHNA1CGcmJKdZyayqauUJ0srsKmiy07FOGP
	9veLqL+hNhFXOmSfmEDVahQZI6zXZs5lKTg8P2UaOwertjpkbJpW78lbfCvjdXJWAe3aHj
	MEbLP3Qr+EyUTAcRTjkIAFL3R7YVH80=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com
 [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS
 (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
 us-mta-583-0PNvEa4nN1eR2EBnl-VF4g-1; Wed, 05 Apr 2023 07:39:22 -0400
X-MC-Unique: 0PNvEa4nN1eR2EBnl-VF4g-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83EE5185A790;
	Wed,  5 Apr 2023 11:39:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from sirius.home.kraxel.org (unknown [10.39.192.200])
	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 482FE1415117;
	Wed,  5 Apr 2023 11:39:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by sirius.home.kraxel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 081CF1800097; Wed,  5 Apr 2023 13:39:21 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 13:39:21 +0200
From: "Gerd Hoffmann" <kraxel@redhat.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, jiewen.yao@intel.com
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] [edk2-openssl fork] Add openssl fork repo to Tianocore to support OpenSSL11_EOL
Message-ID: <4pzqsrlxnn56lgzehoibgiovzhzsgsclibbajptc6u2ajtdf2p@45etglgtly7z>
References: <MW4PR11MB5872F769994F100A316132A78C909@MW4PR11MB5872.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <MW4PR11MB5872F769994F100A316132A78C909@MW4PR11MB5872.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.7
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:37:23AM +0000, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
> Hi
> This is follow up for the "Openssl1.1 replacement proposal" https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/topic/96741156.
> openssl 3.0 POC result is shown at https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-staging/blob/OpenSSL11_EOL/CryptoPkg/Readme-OpenSSL3.0.md
> The size increase is reduced to ~10%.
> 
> In order to achieve maximum size optimization for openssl 3.0, we updated openssl 3.0 branch and recorded to https://github.com/liyi77/openssl/tree/openssl-3.0-POC.
> To help the community review and feedback the openssl 3.0 change and plan to openssl upstream in the future, we should avoid personal branch usage.

I fail to see the point.  To get the openssl changes merged upstream
you needed engage with the openssl community, and I don't see how a
tianocore openssl repository helps with that.

Now that the changes needed have been identified I'd strongly suggest
to focus on getting the changes merged to upstream openssl instead of
storing them in a tianocore fork.

take care,
  Gerd