Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 202002 stable tag

["Liming Gao" <liming.gao@intel.com>]

Lefi and Laszlo:
  I add my comments. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2020 1:25 AM
> To: Leif Lindholm <leif@nuviainc.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Liming <liming.gao@intel.com>
> Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; afish@apple.com; Guptha, Soumya K <soumya.k.guptha@intel.com>; Marvin
> Häuser <marvin.haeuser@outlook.com>; Gao, Zhichao <zhichao.gao@intel.com>; 'ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org'
> <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>; Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; vit9696 <vit9696@protonmail.com>; gaurav.jain@nxp.com; Ni, Ray
> <ray.ni@intel.com>; Feng, Bob C <bob.c.feng@intel.com>; maciej.rabeda@linux.intel.com; leo.duran@amd.com
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 202002 stable tag
> 
> On 02/27/20 17:23, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> > Hi Liming,
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 16:06:22 +0000, Liming Gao wrote:
> >> Stewards:
> >>   I update the patch lists and status. Based on current information,
> >>   only one patch (item 5) needs catch this stable tag. Its fix is
> >>   clear, and risk is low. So, I think we can still keep current
> >>   planning to create stable tag edk2-stable202002 on 2020 Feb 28th
> >>   (UTC – 8). If you think the stable tag needs to be delay for few
> >>   days, please reply the mail before Feb 28th (00:00:00 UTC-8).
> >>
> >>   1.  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/54665 [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] EmbeddedPkg: Fixed Asserts in SCT Runtime Services
> test.
> >> [Liming] This patch is still under review. So, it will not catch this stable tag.
> >>
> >>   1.  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/54693 [edk2-stable202002][edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] MdeModulePkg/Pci: Fixed
> Asserts in SCT PCIIO Protocol Test.
> >
> > Unrelated to the release process, only the formatting:
> > It looks like you are doing ordered lists using markdown syntax
> > (1.). This renders in plain text email simply as all items being 1.
> >
[Liming] Thanks for you suggestion.  

> >> [Liming] The patch has passed review. Package maintainer thinks this is an enhancement. It will be added after stable tag.
> >>
> >>   1.  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/54122 [PATCH 1/1] ShellPkg: Add support for input with separately reported modifiers
> >> [Liming] The discussion shows this change needs UEFI spec clarification. So, it may not be resolved in short team. It will not catch this
> stable tag. The discussion is in BZ 2510.
> >>
> >>   1.  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/54797 [PATCH 0/2] UefiCpuPkg/Library: Fix bug in MpInitLib
> >> [Liming] The solution is under discussion (BZ 2556). The submitter requests this issue to be fixed happen reasonably soon. So, it may
> not catch this stable tag.
> >>
> >>   1.  https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/54992 [Patch 1/1][edk2-stable202002]BaseTools: Fixed a regression issue in Makefile for
> incremental build
> >> [Liming] This patch has passed review. This regression causes the basic incremental build not work with VS nmake tool. The fix is clear.
> So, it need to catch this stable tag.
> >
> > I agree it needs to catch the stable tag. If it affects only VS builds
> > then I am not going to insist on extending the hard freeze, but I
> > (technically on holiday today/tomorrow) don't have time to dig much
> > deeper into it.
> >
[Liming] This fix is to restore the original behavior before the commit 818283de3f6d 
for !INCLUDE style in Makefile generation. It does update GNUmakefile and VS makefile 
generation. Because it just restores original behavior, its quality risk is low. So, I suggest 
to catch it in this stable tag on current release planning. 

> > However, I think the process is pretty clear that this *should* extend
> > the hard freeze.
> >
[Liming] I am not aware of the process to extend the hard freeze. But, you think more time is 
required for the review and test on the critical bug fix. I am OK.

> > I will note that from the trail (commitdate of 818283de3f6d until
> > BZ2563 was raised) it appears that detecting this bug itself, which
> > went in two days before the soft freeze, took 15 days.
> 
[Liming] Yes. It takes 15 days to expose this issue. 

> I agree with Liming's analysis on the patches (i.e., what goes in and
> what gets postponed), and I agree with Leif that we should extend the
> hard freeze by at least a couple of days.
[Liming] If you both agree to extend the hard freeze, I have no objection. 
I request to extend few days instead of few weeks if no other critical issues are reported. 
Then, the impact of the community can be reduced. 

> 
> This is not unusual. Originally I thought that edk2 freeze and release
> dates were set in stone, but then Mike explained to me that that had
> never been the intent. And other open source projects do several
> pre-releases (rc0, rc1, .... pre-releases with "release critical" (rc)
> bug fixes), before a final release. For example, QEMU regularly plans
> rc0..rc2 or even rc3, and then *optionally* adds an rc4 if even rc3
> receives significant bugfixes. The idea is that the final release / tag
> should be preceded by a silent / calm period, where we've waited a few
> days and become reasonably convinced that "OK, there's nothing else we
> should obviously fix right now".
> 
> I wouldn't immediately suggest a full week extension, but maybe until
> March 4th (middle of next week)?
[Liming] March 4th is one good choice to reserve few days for the different time zone people.
If no more feedback, I will send announcement to delay this stable tag on Feb 28th (00:00:00 UTC-8).

Thanks
Liming
> 
> Thanks
> Laszlo