From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web12.1268.1574214382876796915 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:46:23 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=missing; spf=pass (domain: intel.com, ip: 134.134.136.100, mailfrom: hao.a.wu@intel.com) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Nov 2019 17:46:22 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,220,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="200556267" Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 19 Nov 2019 17:46:21 -0800 Received: from fmsmsx102.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.200) by FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:46:13 -0800 Received: from shsmsx151.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.50) by FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.200) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:46:13 -0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.127]) by SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.149]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 09:46:11 +0800 From: "Wu, Hao A" To: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "leif.lindholm@linaro.org" , Laszlo Ersek CC: "Gao, Liming" , "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/j4AAHtqhcA== Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 01:46:10 +0000 Message-ID: References: <4A89E2EF3DFEDB4C8BFDE51014F606A14E5437BA@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <48a7f95e-1028-ea52-9980-da7af871cef2@redhat.com> <20191119190151.GE7323@bivouac.eciton.net> In-Reply-To: <20191119190151.GE7323@bivouac.eciton.net> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] MIME-Version: 1.0 Return-Path: hao.a.wu@intel.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of Le= if > 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 >=20 > 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 th= e > > > 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: A= dd > [packages] section in dsc file > > > > This patch can be merged during the Soft Feature Freeze. It was posted > > 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). >=20 > Agreed. >=20 > > > 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 even > > during the Hard Feature Freeze. >=20 > 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. Thanks Leif, I will create a pull request to push this bugfix ASAP. Best Regards, Hao Wu >=20 > > > 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. >=20 > I'm OK either way. >=20 > > > 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. >=20 > I am against merging this, even though it's low-risk. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > I also dislike the mixing of doxygen formating changes and plain > whitespace changes. Even though trivial, it ought to be split up. >=20 > > > 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 SF= F, > > so it can definitely go in. >=20 > Agree (if cutting it close). >=20 > > > 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 the > > same posting.) > > > > Second, the three patches for the UNI files add too much brand new tex= t > > 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. >=20 > Agree. >=20 > > > 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() descriptio= n > > [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. >=20 > Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? > I don't see why it should be considered. >=20 > > > 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 t= aste: > > > > 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 telling > > apart purely syntactic (typo) fixes from semantic (wording) fixes. As = a > > reviewer I would suggest splitting this patch at least in two (typos v= s. > > 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 i= n > > this instance. >=20 > Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? > I don't see why it should be considered. >=20 > I also agree on the needs splitting up bit. >=20 > Best Regards, >=20 > Leif >=20 >=20