Am Mi., 4. Apr. 2018 um 18:10 Uhr schrieb Aaron Durbin via coreboot <>:

> > Agree, but coreboot use old commit from edk2. Is it fine to push
> vUDK2018?
> I guess? I'm not really sure who uses edk2. I guess tianocore payload?
> Patrick is on holiday right now, but he would probably the best person
> to answer that.
It's used for the tianocore payload, indeed.
And yes, updating to a newer commit is fine.

> > I believe coreboot should stick to edk2 releases not to random commits
> > in the tree.
That sounds like a reasonable guideline.
However if a release isn't fit for use as a coreboot payload, I'd go for
(not so) random commits that fix problems rather than stick to another
project's schedule and keep things broken.

> Can anyone tell what tests were made against tianocore payload? There
> > are patches in payload/external/tianocore/patches and I'm not sure
> > against what hardware those should be validated.
The payload integration stuff is provided on a best-effort basis, so right
now "it builds and it boots on one system" is good enough.
If you want to support the default payload selection for your board(s),
I'll appreciate your effort, and we could tighten up the policy around it
(so that you, and others who volunteer to test, would have to sign off on
updates that might affect their supported systems).
Ideally we'd have automated hardware testing, but that's a sore point for
years now. :-(

Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft:
Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado
coreboot mailing list:

Reply via email to