From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.40.49]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.4608.1600890396945519977 for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:46:37 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=fail reason="body hash did not verify" header.i=@outlook.com header.s=selector1 header.b=L4qEpM4L; spf=pass (domain: outlook.com, ip: 40.92.40.49, mailfrom: spbrogan@outlook.com) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SuLhbt4kaqkv1gmxFgt7ndsRM90I8S49jSvjL4HXrbCdpyFvJXlFRn0riPDViFmEcll0EFqV/Z3BLn/13HgaKJ1hP54SNrn37eTRDZ+zYrDEq1REaL+2ptJwnOf0u4MMRMF8Eqq3/wdQUPZZx5vJZYM+dOZ/t+6QbJe7I8TTxPyaOuUuwRqlVPSJVWoL3uBIJ1nYlF9MFL7CYg1N0CDhU8evM+Vrmi3okwm1DuV5VU2ma9IGiTziQAN1xT0YZj1EtinxBuypalc+8cNzqo+NxHpj7zLlFjGhK5qoaRiwbbMAzTBkD3UjUUHvqCX7ieSK9a7CGii+4ti2DiYZA2CoGg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DNz3vV9QClS2sK1MEMXqhL/Dw+VzNzw4wHNLIgTi2vE=; b=G8eF96OqMk72qeTCj4qczcZEMNyyTN22KP23mQ5zi9dGgFJubnyl1JE9IAiCMEaTXjNdx/p2lQ8Rral0o1DNZwoousJqCAJlm5irDuRbo6ZykNaBTGNiwFU2HxFtFErTn9GW3Jvka+Ls58vm0pGdRWkKLahFZPVLzd1GE+6kTJtbB8xlwqSS41yq3NfO2V7WDRNWGINsK3C+pIa6CR4TUcO45lZftCAC9oGMVbjvtwIcZ12VjecNrN3/Y15T2GaQNIgV4UTPgxWW9VZZKsxDsAjMjeGZAiBBcKHx+qFZmZDIKC7t+KviQhA0v+bSQxVhF4qFyq+KDiWFjOCoF1z5BQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outlook.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DNz3vV9QClS2sK1MEMXqhL/Dw+VzNzw4wHNLIgTi2vE=; b=L4qEpM4L2rZ9K2F3ySMi9e7l22gjZdBUBeTSD/Fc3c9L+sWMf9W/kGi6xOTvgeg64/Oso2CRrD+uZlcA9qw21AcyuZWotdufTgUZRLgnLy7penIthMTqMU7DdWGiuG/p461d6qosCa6AE39HvRZpgbTRb3pj7/iOuMG5CVnpK30327t+jClnndxBIUMxGyCb9okW6vbbI5q4iquSUSKmGCaW4mS8Iv3heYGr8LqqzXatXNCDYfAgErVRzP7W3p0b3sYbP8dEvBPlb7f1gYKwliLwWYOp5hpj5m8GefuVIIDqnYjDB8d5IEQBA02ZfOcK+Xx8W/c8blaT2W3y7UbbjQ== Received: from MW2NAM10FT065.eop-nam10.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7e87::40) by MW2NAM10HT077.eop-nam10.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7e87::289) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3391.15; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:46:35 +0000 Received: from MN2PR07MB6974.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7e87::52) by MW2NAM10FT065.mail.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7e87::168) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3412.21 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:46:35 +0000 X-IncomingTopHeaderMarker: OriginalChecksum:633CBD7ABAB7613F71F1988ABE6D69A2BFE2B0BB6C3D8FEA0666E1E97444C9C5;UpperCasedChecksum:8AD4D2788B5DB24BEE7ED6BC0D59EE6C60F93DF88F2F6DDCBCF45166ED7A4809;SizeAsReceived:9410;Count:48 Received: from MN2PR07MB6974.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7c9a:3869:2441:513e]) by MN2PR07MB6974.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7c9a:3869:2441:513e%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3412.020; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:46:35 +0000 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [EXTERNAL] [PATCH v8 00/14] Add the VariablePolicy feature To: devel@edk2.groups.io, ard.biesheuvel@arm.com, Laszlo Ersek , bret.barkelew@microsoft.com, samer.el-haj-mahmoud@arm.com CC: "Yao, Jiewen" , Dandan Bi , Chao Zhang , Jian J Wang , Hao A Wu , "liming.gao" , Jordan Justen , Andrew Fish , "Ni, Ray" References: <20200923060748.3795-1-bret.barkelew@microsoft.com> <1d4ef977-beb8-f7de-a4f9-4137dd23ed50@arm.com> <64b7b95c-0a8b-9ab1-8e85-ccc0610d6bad@arm.com> From: "Sean" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2020 12:46:31 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 In-Reply-To: <64b7b95c-0a8b-9ab1-8e85-ccc0610d6bad@arm.com> X-TMN: [bjnF6HsAThm1LSh4SaDn00A020Ou36Yw] X-ClientProxiedBy: CO2PR04CA0131.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:104:7::33) To MN2PR07MB6974.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:1a8::18) Return-Path: spbrogan@outlook.com X-Microsoft-Original-Message-ID: <3f4887ed-6ce2-17a8-73e2-f857f45f3546@outlook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [192.168.2.78] (50.47.113.221) by CO2PR04CA0131.namprd04.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:104:7::33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3412.20 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 23 Sep 2020 19:46:33 +0000 X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-IncomingHeaderCount: 48 X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 1b47ff88-3f9d-4bf1-10c6-08d85ff960b9 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: MW2NAM10HT077: X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: sZ27CDXdmMsX9TSVQF4r6aiVj6TeG3rUJNvfdmEWkR360XjQ4KAoY/27EM7n50F65s5dWDN8KQnFit95hHsUkS02x6Q0eEbLJaAk04xqTYdMjZeT9Lx6VH1eNcEMmdrr7/Kgs8ky3YJ0Mt8ac9PDNQsRvN9SJm+pTgP+sTt9X61NNDIqAzS/NZQGFMib+WG8IetVaMxM3nhGRk5RR+xrzOLgHTKALU7q0Zq9WSGhaKwF1+t5ThsVOMvFhDIDDOpw X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 1+/I5tU8KedHgy8wkzHevuSdGP9eIlvaleooFtAyo4Ubw9bDoZXa2qnUuas+iCgt49XLRIkKgs7CYOs7gWZSGQ7S+8Bv4dxHwbG4frT54eTs7Bu9plJVAeHa95mI4QwIycu6sD+6zCPfwzEp+nrY2w== X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1b47ff88-3f9d-4bf1-10c6-08d85ff960b9 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Sep 2020 19:46:34.9919 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MW2NAM10FT065.eop-nam10.prod.protection.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MW2NAM10HT077 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ard/Laszlo/Samer (since you reported issue with RngLib), Is now the time to start a discussion about using submodules or at least= =20 tracked dependencies in edk2-platforms. The way it stands the only=20 thing you can use to correlate the two are the timestamp of the commit.=20 This means that the history of edk2-platforms will not actually be any=20 different if you merge into edk2 as a two part series or one. This has been a major pain point as someone who wants to use=20 edk2-platforms downstream. Another benefit of tracked dependencies is that each platform or group=20 of commonly managed platforms would move their dependencies as they=20 incorporate any edk2 change. This also gives visibility into the=20 maintenance and status of a platform. Thanks Sean On 9/23/2020 3:17 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 9/23/20 12:04 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 09/23/20 11:43, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >>> On 09/23/20 11:22, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>> On 9/23/20 10:45 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >>>>> On 09/23/20 08:12, Bret Barkelew via groups.io wrote: >>>>>> To whom it may concern, >>>>>> This is as done as it=E2=80=99s going to get. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you all for your help! >>>>> >>>>> Seems like it's been fully reviewed. If that's the case -- do you wa= nt >>>>> me to merge it? >>>>> >>>>> (Asking because the series modifies multiple packages, so there=20 >>>>> isn't a >>>>> maintainer that's uniquely responsible for merging the series.) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, please. This has been going on long enough. >>>> >>>> Only question I have is breakage in edk2-platforms - it seems that mo= st >>>> platforms there are broken atm anyway due to the RngLib change having >>>> been merged, but it would be good to have an idea what the status is= =20 >>>> there. >>>> >>> >>> Judged from patches 05 through 08, the platforms in edk2-platforms are >>> going to need some new lib class resolutions. Therefore I think we mig= ht >>> have to merge this in two parts: >>> >>> - patches 01-08 in the first go, >>> - [update edk2-platforms to mimick patches 05-08], >>> - patches 09-14 in the second round. >>> >>> If Bret is OK with that, I can start merging 01-08 soon. >>> >>> (In theory, we could merge patches 05-08 as a part of the second round= , >>> because technically, edk2-platforms only need 01-04. However, if some >>> commit messages in edk2-platforms would like to reference *example >>> platform code* from edk2, then having stable commit hashes for patches >>> 05-08 in edk2 would be useful. Hence my suggestion to include 05-08 in >>> the first round of edk2 merging.) >> >> ... on a second thought, we could merge this series in a single PR as >> well; only edk2-platforms would have to advance its edk2 submodule >> reference in two stages: >> >> - first advance the submodule to patch#8, >> - then update its own platform DSC files with the new lib instances, >> - then advance the edk2 submodule again, to patch#14. >> >> If that works for you, I think we should merge this edk2 set in one go >> -- less work for me, and much more intuitive when viewed from the edk2 >> side. (The series would not be stuck in some half-merged state for any >> time at all.) >> >=20 > We don't actually use git submodules there, so this does not work. >=20 > But I am fine with just merging this, as edk2-platforms has been=20 > reported to be in broken state anyway. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20