Hi Stewards and all: New bugs are for 201911 stable tag. Can you give the comments for them?
Bug List (those all have pass code review): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50931 [PATCH] MdeModulePkg: LzmaCustomDecompressLib.inf don't support EBC anymore https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50990 [PATCH V1 1/1] MdeModulePkg/Variable: Initialize local variable https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50989 [PATCH V2] BaseTools:fix regression issue for platform .map file https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50936 [PATCH] BaseTools:fixed Build failed issue for Non-English OS Thanks Liming >-----Original Message----- >From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of >Liming Gao >Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 10:52 PM >To: devel@edk2.groups.io; leif.lindh...@linaro.org; Laszlo Ersek ><ler...@redhat.com> >Cc: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; 'af...@apple.com' ><af...@apple.com> >Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag > >Laszlo and Leif: > Thanks for your detail review. I will continue to monitor the coming changes >for 201911 stable tag. > >Thanks >Liming >> -----Original Message----- >> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Leif >Lindholm >> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 3:02 AM >> To: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> >> Cc: Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D ><michael.d.kin...@intel.com>; 'af...@apple.com' <af...@apple.com>; >> devel@edk2.groups.io >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Patch List for 201911 stable tag >> >> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 06:50:19PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> > On 11/19/19 15:25, Gao, Liming wrote: >> > > Hi Stewards and all: >> > > I collect current patch lists in devel mail list. Those patch >> > > contributors request to add them for 201911 stable tag. Because the >> > > time is close to Hard Feature Freeze, I want to collect your >> > > feedback for below patches. >> > > >> > > Feature List (those all have pass code review): >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50602 [PATCH V2] BaseTools: >Add [packages] section in dsc file >> > >> > This patch can be merged during the Soft Feature Freeze. It was posted >> > before the Soft Feature Freeze, and also reviewed (by Bob, i.e. a >> > BaseTools Maintainer) before the Soft Feature Freeze. >> > >> > As far as I can see, there is still an outstanding question from you, to >> > Zhiju ("Can you show what test are done for this new support?"), so I >> > think we should await the response to that. >> > >> > Note that the patch should not be merged once the Hard Feature Freeze >> > starts, so there are ~3 days for Zhiju to answer the question about >> > testing (and for you to acknowledge that you are OK with the reply). >> >> Agreed. >> >> > > Bug List (those all have pass code review): >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50625 [PATCH v1] >MdeModulePkg/NvmExpressDxe: Fix wrong queue size for async IO >> queues >> > >> > Looks very much like a bugfix to me, so it's suitable for merging even >> > during the Hard Feature Freeze. >> >> I agree. But I am still slightly nervous about changing such a >> fundamental part of such a fundamental driver. Certainly if it is >> going in, I want it in ASAP, not just at the end of soft freeze - to >> give us as much time as possible to revert it if the fix exposes >> latent errors in previously working systems. >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50406 [PATCH 1/1] >MdePkg/Include: Add missing definitions of SMBIOS type 42h in >> SmBios.h >> > >> > Based on Abner's response in the thread, this change does not appear >> > necessary for fixing actual functionality bugs; it rather completes a >> > previously incomplete feature addition. And Abner is not in a rush to >> > catch the upcoming stable tag with the patch. I suggest to delay it. >> > >> > If others disagree, I won't insist; the above is just my preference. >> >> I'm OK either way. >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50661 [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: >Update the coding styles >> > >> > Hmmm, quite undecided on this one. Does not fix a functionality bug >> > either, but what it fixes *are* a coding style bugs, and the patch is >> > low risk. I'm leaning towards merging it. >> >> I am against merging this, even though it's low-risk. >> >> The process says: >> "By the date of the soft feature freeze, developers must have sent >> their patches to the mailing list and received positive maintainer >> reviews (Reviewed-by or Acked-by tags)." >> This received Acks 4 days late. >> >> If it came with a commit message indicating the incorrect comment >> syntax caused problems with document generation, then maybe it could >> be considered from a bugfix standpoint. But it didn't and it's too >> late to re-scope the change at this point. >> >> I also dislike the mixing of doxygen formating changes and plain >> whitespace changes. Even though trivial, it ought to be split up. >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50662 [PATCH] MdePkg: >Update the comments of IsLanguageSupported >> > >> > This was even reviewed by a package maintainer (= you) before the SFF, >> > so it can definitely go in. >> >> Agree (if cutting it close). >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50663 [PATCH 0/3] Add >missing strings for uni files >> > >> > First of all, the structure of this series is wrong; please see my >> > feedback here: >> > >> > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50666 >> > >> > (The two patches discussed just above were incorrectly included in the >> > same posting.) >> > >> > Second, the three patches for the UNI files add too much brand new text >> > for my taste, for them to be considered bugfixes. The patches were >> > posted in time for the SFF, but the maintainer reviews came too late: >> > >> > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50872 >> > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50869 >> > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50870 >> > >> > I suggest postponing. >> >> Agree. >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50866 [PATCH V1 0/2] >Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description >> > >> > I'm seriously confused by the subject prefixes in this patch thread. >> > What's going on with the version numbers? >> > >> > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V1 0/2] Improve PeiInstallPeiMemory() description >> > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V3 1/2] MdeModulePkg PeiCore: Improve >PeiInstallPeiMemory() description >> > [edk2-devel] [PATCH V1 2/2] MdePkg PiPeiCis.h: Improve >PeiInstallPeiMemory() description >> > >> > Other than that... I'm torn. I guess I could be convinced that these >> > patches are indeed bugfixes, so I'm leaning towards merging them. >> >> Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? >> I don't see why it should be considered. >> >> > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/50841 [PATCH V2 1/1] >MdeModulePkg PeiCore: Fix typos >> > >> > Personally I'm not happy about this patch. It's way too large for my taste: >> > >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain.inf | 10 ++-- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/FwVol/FwVol.h | 20 +++---- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain.h | 52 ++++++++-------- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Dependency/Dependency.c | 12 ++-- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Dispatcher/Dispatcher.c | 51 ++++++++-------- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/FwVol/FwVol.c | 63 ++++++++++---------- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Hob/Hob.c | 4 +- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Image/Image.c | 10 ++-- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Memory/MemoryServices.c | 18 +++--- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/PeiMain/PeiMain.c | 2 +- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Ppi/Ppi.c | 4 +- >> > MdeModulePkg/Core/Pei/Security/Security.c | 12 ++-- >> > 12 files changed, 129 insertions(+), 129 deletions(-) >> > >> > and it mixes multiple kinds of changes: >> > >> > "Fixes typos and clarifies some wording throughout PeiCore." >> > >> > When reviewing such a patch, the reviewer has a difficult time telling >> > apart purely syntactic (typo) fixes from semantic (wording) fixes. As a >> > reviewer I would suggest splitting this patch at least in two (typos vs. >> > semantics). Then I could be convinced such a set of two patches is >> > purely a bugfix. >> > >> > I'm leaning towards "postpone" on this one, but I can see why people >> > would think "that's arbitrary". I guess I'll have to defer to others in >> > this instance. >> >> Non-functional change submitted after start of soft-freeze? >> I don't see why it should be considered. >> >> I also agree on the needs splitting up bit. >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Leif >> >> > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#51009): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/51009 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/60556595/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
