From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com (out03.mta.xmission.com [166.70.13.233]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.45618.1606180775399942640 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:19:35 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@bsdio.com header.s=xmission header.b=UaVSBbO9; spf=none, err=SPF record not found (domain: bsdio.com, ip: 166.70.13.233, mailfrom: rebecca@bsdio.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=simple/simple; d=bsdio.com; s=xmission; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=A2LcYD5KjC6BGnoXtDB4+6MttrQ71A8NOgVTY5rXoVs=; b=UaVSBbO9QqmKS0uGIAVcbALN6G 3bbeG/2rkTIGSxprDPgQLofClkXF8hYWWuGbzu5a3xYE8JK3EM3Nh1Alwn6c6SoFAAouA+UQ2VQQ9 5WOzYK4NgiHqAOV55ny6Brld31iaGJwxupPoZnoesrO9ey1Prtzk/YTZrz0SfMhcy7ac=; Received: from in02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.52]) by out03.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khMzV-00BFwU-K9; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:33 -0700 Received: from mta4.zcs.xmission.com ([166.70.13.68]) by in02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1khMzU-0041lI-Mk; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:33 -0700 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mta4.zcs.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529A15001BC; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:31 -0700 (MST) X-Amavis-Modified: Mail body modified (using disclaimer) - mta4.zcs.xmission.com Received: from mta4.zcs.xmission.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta4.zcs.xmission.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 5SuF5eXWsjPd; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from [10.0.10.142] (c-174-52-16-57.hsd1.ut.comcast.net [174.52.16.57]) by mta4.zcs.xmission.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F67750060C; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:31 -0700 (MST) To: devel@edk2.groups.io, lersek@redhat.com Cc: Jordan Justen , Ard Biesheuvel , Peter Grehan References: <20201124005733.18107-1-rebecca@bsdio.com> <3496af87-f723-6cf9-c0dd-916c711e5a84@redhat.com> From: "Rebecca Cran" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 18:19:30 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3496af87-f723-6cf9-c0dd-916c711e5a84@redhat.com> X-XM-SPF: eid=1khMzU-0041lI-Mk;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=166.70.13.68;;;frm=rebecca@bsdio.com;;;spf=none X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 166.70.13.68 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: rebecca@bsdio.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on sa05.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.3 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,NICE_REPLY_A,TR_XM_SB_Phish,T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG, T_TooManySym_01,TooManyTo_001,XMSubLong,XMSubPhish11 autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5068] * 0.3 TooManyTo_001 Multiple "To" Header Recipients 2x (uncommon) * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa05 1397; IP=ok Body=1 Fuz1=1] [Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 1.5 XMSubPhish11 Phishy Language Subject * -0.0 NICE_REPLY_A Looks like a legit reply (A) * 0.0 TR_XM_SB_Phish Phishing flag in subject of message X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa05 1397; IP=ok Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: **;devel@edk2.groups.io, lersek@redhat.com X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 480 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.06 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 12 (2.5%), b_tie_ro: 10 (2.1%), parse: 1.60 (0.3%), extract_message_metadata: 6 (1.2%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.85 (0.2%), tests_pri_-1000: 4.0 (0.8%), tests_pri_-950: 1.98 (0.4%), tests_pri_-900: 1.58 (0.3%), tests_pri_-90: 89 (18.6%), check_bayes: 87 (18.0%), b_tokenize: 8 (1.6%), b_tok_get_all: 6 (1.2%), b_comp_prob: 2.7 (0.6%), b_tok_touch_all: 66 (13.9%), b_finish: 1.17 (0.2%), tests_pri_0: 342 (71.2%), check_dkim_signature: 0.68 (0.1%), check_dkim_adsp: 178 (37.0%), poll_dns_idle: 170 (35.4%), tests_pri_10: 4.3 (0.9%), tests_pri_500: 14 (3.0%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 0/3] various bhyve tweaks and updates X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 08 Feb 2020 21:53:50 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US On 11/23/20 6:04 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > Can this whole set wait until after edk2-stable202011, or would you like > me to merge patch#1 ("OvmfPkg/Bhyve: Add VariablePolicy engine to > Bhyve") in isolation, during the Hard Feature Freeze? (It definitely > qualifies, because it fixes a build regression caused by the patches for > TianoCore#2522.) > > I don't think we should merge patches #2 and #3 during the HFF. I'm not sure it makes sense to have patch #1 without #3 to make it usable on AMD, so let's leave the whole set until after the stable tag. We can leave bhyve users on 2014.SP1 firmware a few days longer :) -- Rebecca Cran