Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/5] MdePkg, SecurityPkg, OvmfPkg: revert unreviewed SM3 patches

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>]

On 7/4/19 6:05 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> On 07/04/19 11:46, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> Repo:   https://github.com/lersek/edk2.git
>> Branch: revert_unreviewed_bz1781
>>
>> The MdePkg patch and the OvmfPkg patch committed for
>> <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1781> had not been
>> reviewed appropriately, so they must be reverted. Due to the MdePkg
>> patch being the basis of the entire series, the SecurityPkg patches in
>> the middle have to be reverted as well. (Leif pointed out that at least
>> some of the SecurityPkg patches were not reviewed *on the list* either,
>> so there's that too.)
> 
> I've now pushed this series (commit range 1ec05b81e59f..6a34c1ce7054),
> with Leif's (as a steward's) R-b, and Phil's R-b.
> 
> If these patches had been normal patches, obviously I would have waited
> for package maintainer review. However, these are *not* normal patches;
> they are reverts which return the tree to an earlier state -- to a state
> where unreviewed patches had not gone in yet. There's an argument to be
> made that Jian should have reverted the original patches without me
> having to post a revert series to the list at all -- either way, this
> has been urgent because the delta with the unreviewed patches "in"
> should be as minimal as possible. (Which is why I took it upon me to
> send the set.) For example, a bisection should preferably not hit the
> unreviewed range (good point from Leif). Furthermore, if we diverge too
> much meanwhile, then the reverts themselves could become messy.

Agreed, this is why I wanted this merged quickly, thanks.

> Imran: please resubmit your patches now. Please pay attention to shallow
> threading, and to actually working CC's. Regarding the SecurityPkg
> patches, if you are going to post them unchanged, please preserve the
> Reviewed-by tags from the SecurityPkg maintainers, but *ONLY IF* those
> Reviewed-by tags had been given publicly, on the list. (In other words,
> if they can be found in the mailing list archive.)
> 
> Thanks
> Laszlo