MinPlatformPkg question

MinPlatformPkg question

[Kirkendall, Garrett]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 731 bytes --]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Start the conversation:
Some time back there were posts about promoting MinPlatformPkg up to a more generic level.  Is there still a desire to implement this and possibly even to promote this more generic MinPlatformPkg to the edk2 repository.  Would it be expanded to encompass different architectures other than x86, and maybe how?

GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D92413.D947A4F0]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3903 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2614 bytes --]

Re: MinPlatformPkg question

[Chang, Abner]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1154 bytes --]

[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Hi Garret,
Thanks for bringing this discussion. We agree with this and want (also help) to see the common modules in this package were moved out of MinPlatform, as AMD server platform also leverage it.

Regards,
Abner

From: Kirkendall, Garrett <Garrett.Kirkendall@amd.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2023 1:30 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io
Subject: MinPlatformPkg question


[AMD Official Use Only - General]

Start the conversation:
Some time back there were posts about promoting MinPlatformPkg up to a more generic level.  Is there still a desire to implement this and possibly even to promote this more generic MinPlatformPkg to the edk2 repository.  Would it be expanded to encompass different architectures other than x86, and maybe how?

GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D924E9.3A70EF40]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5706 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2614 bytes --]

MinPlatformPkg question

[Kirkendall, Garrett]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 740 bytes --]

[Public]

+ MinPlatformPkg Maintainers

Start the conversation:
Some time back there were posts about promoting MinPlatformPkg up to a more generic level.  Is there still a desire to implement this and possibly even to promote this more generic MinPlatformPkg to the edk2 repository.  Would it be expanded to encompass different architectures other than x86, and maybe how?


GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D92658.1A4E0AC0]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 4039 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2614 bytes --]

Re: MinPlatformPkg question

[Isaac Oram]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2433 bytes --]

Garrett,

Preface:  I don't have a strong objection to moving MinPlatformPkg.  I would generally prefer to move silicon/platform/board specific content out of edk2 and into edk2-platforms or elsewhere.
I am concerned that moving content could negatively impact current users in a way that would increase fragmentation though.  I that eventually someone will make a package manager and then it will all be localized and won't matter where packages come from.


I am very interested in expanding use.  We have purposefully avoided "finishing" to a 1.0 version of spec until more adoption has occurred.

I have not seen any feedback on what would be needed to expand to different architectures.  I personally have some open questions for discussion, like the approach for standardized FV layout and the use of PCD to describe them.  And refactoring the DSC/FDF include content.  QemuOpenBoardPkg work generated a better option there.

I would propose that we modify and extend the current content in a mostly backwards compatible way.  Then, once we have the changes clear, we make an incompatible MinPlatformV1Pkg or something like that in conjunction with 1.0 spec.  The benefit I would like is not punishing existing adopters and ending up with a simple/minimal package for longer term use.

Regards,
Isaac

From: Kirkendall, Garrett <Garrett.Kirkendall@amd.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 5:33 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Chiu, Chasel <chasel.chiu@intel.com>; Desimone, Nathaniel L <nathaniel.l.desimone@intel.com>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>; Gao, Liming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
Subject: MinPlatformPkg question


[Public]

+ MinPlatformPkg Maintainers

Start the conversation:
Some time back there were posts about promoting MinPlatformPkg up to a more generic level.  Is there still a desire to implement this and possibly even to promote this more generic MinPlatformPkg to the edk2 repository.  Would it be expanded to encompass different architectures other than x86, and maybe how?


GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D92675.025F4F10]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7205 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2614 bytes --]

Re: MinPlatformPkg question

[Kirkendall, Garrett]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3925 bytes --]

[Public]

Isaac,

One of the obvious hindrances to acceptance is the Firmware Volumes with Fsp in the name.  They would be obvious to an Intel FSP solution, but they are not obvious to any other solution.  Would it be possible to give them a more generic descriptive name that would apply to any type of solution?

GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D93562.64340C20]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."

From: Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 3:44 PM
To: Kirkendall, Garrett <Garrett.Kirkendall@amd.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Chiu, Chasel <chasel.chiu@intel.com>; Desimone, Nathaniel L <nathaniel.l.desimone@intel.com>; Gao, Liming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>; Bobroff, Zachary <zacharyb@ami.com>; Zimmer, Vincent <vincent.zimmer@intel.com>
Subject: RE: MinPlatformPkg question

Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.

Garrett,

Preface:  I don't have a strong objection to moving MinPlatformPkg.  I would generally prefer to move silicon/platform/board specific content out of edk2 and into edk2-platforms or elsewhere.
I am concerned that moving content could negatively impact current users in a way that would increase fragmentation though.  I that eventually someone will make a package manager and then it will all be localized and won't matter where packages come from.


I am very interested in expanding use.  We have purposefully avoided "finishing" to a 1.0 version of spec until more adoption has occurred.

I have not seen any feedback on what would be needed to expand to different architectures.  I personally have some open questions for discussion, like the approach for standardized FV layout and the use of PCD to describe them.  And refactoring the DSC/FDF include content.  QemuOpenBoardPkg work generated a better option there.

I would propose that we modify and extend the current content in a mostly backwards compatible way.  Then, once we have the changes clear, we make an incompatible MinPlatformV1Pkg or something like that in conjunction with 1.0 spec.  The benefit I would like is not punishing existing adopters and ending up with a simple/minimal package for longer term use.

Regards,
Isaac

From: Kirkendall, Garrett <Garrett.Kirkendall@amd.com<mailto:Garrett.Kirkendall@amd.com>>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 5:33 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; Chiu, Chasel <chasel.chiu@intel.com<mailto:chasel.chiu@intel.com>>; Desimone, Nathaniel L <nathaniel.l.desimone@intel.com<mailto:nathaniel.l.desimone@intel.com>>; Oram, Isaac W <isaac.w.oram@intel.com<mailto:isaac.w.oram@intel.com>>; Gao, Liming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn<mailto:gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>>; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com<mailto:eric.dong@intel.com>>
Subject: MinPlatformPkg question


[Public]

+ MinPlatformPkg Maintainers

Start the conversation:
Some time back there were posts about promoting MinPlatformPkg up to a more generic level.  Is there still a desire to implement this and possibly even to promote this more generic MinPlatformPkg to the edk2 repository.  Would it be expanded to encompass different architectures other than x86, and maybe how?


GARRETT KIRKENDALL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/AMD> |  Twitter<https://twitter.com/AMD> |  amd.com<http://www.amd.com/>
[cid:image001.png@01D93562.64340C20]

Words to live by: "Slow is Smooth.  Smooth is Fast."


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 11589 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: image001.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 2614 bytes --]