Would you please send me the URL for the Linux patch? I would check with other OS people as well.
Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > Biesheuvel > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 7:24 PM > To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com> > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Dionna > Glaze <dionnagl...@google.com>; Xu, Min M <min.m...@intel.com>; James > Bottomley <j...@linux.ibm.com>; Tom Lendacky > <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; Aktas, Erdem <erdemak...@google.com>; > Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v9 0/4] Add safe unaccepted memory > behavior > > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 at 12:11, Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com> wrote: > > > > Sorry, that I did not say clearly. > > > > When I say: "sign-off", I mean the Linux community and the maintainer > have reached the consensus and agree to merge the patch for OS. > > > > Would you please send to me the email from the maintainer, or the URL to > record the conversation? > > > > I am the maintainer. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ard > > > Biesheuvel > > > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 5:32 PM > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com> > > > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; Dionna Glaze > > > <dionnagl...@google.com>; Xu, Min M <min.m...@intel.com>; James > > > Bottomley <j...@linux.ibm.com>; Tom Lendacky > > > <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; Aktas, Erdem > <erdemak...@google.com>; > > > Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D > > > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v9 0/4] Add safe unaccepted memory > > > behavior > > > > > > On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 at 08:33, Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > This is API between BIOS and OS. > > > > > > > > I would like to see sign-off from OS side at least, before we can merge > to > > > EDKII main. > > > > > > > > > > I have already indicated (and am happy to repeat here) that for Linux, > > > I am fine with this approach, if it amounts to locating a protocol and > > > invoking it to inform the firmware that it doesn't need to accept all > > > available memory. > > > > > > Once we phase out the eager accept from the firmware entirely, we can > > > remove the protocol as well, and the OS loader will look for it and > > > simply not find it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 3:18 PM > > > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com> > > > > > Cc: Dionna Glaze <dionnagl...@google.com>; Ard Biescheuvel > > > > > <a...@kernel.org>; Xu, Min M <min.m...@intel.com>; James > Bottomley > > > > > <j...@linux.ibm.com>; Tom Lendacky > <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; > > > Aktas, > > > > > Erdem <erdemak...@google.com>; Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com>; > > > Kinney, > > > > > Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > > > > > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v9 0/4] Add safe unaccepted > memory > > > > > behavior > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 03:46:34AM +0000, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > > > > Hi Dionna > > > > > > I think I understand your intention. > > > > > > I believe we need OS side and UEFI standard sign-off for this > > > > > *BZ3987_MEMORY_ACCEPTANCE_PROTOCOL*, because OS is the > > > consumer, > > > > > right? > > > > > > If so, I suggest you maintain the work in a edk2-stage area for > > > > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-staging. > > > > > > > > > > > > EDKII main branch is for production. MdePkg can only include the > API > > > > > definition approved by UEFI standard. > > > > > > EDK2 staging is a place for POC / collaboration. That is why I think > edk2 > > > > > staging is more proper place for this feature. > > > > > > > > > > > > Without OS and UEFI standard sign-off, I don't think this > > > > > BZ3987_MEMORY_ACCEPTANCE_PROTOCOL can be integrated to > EDKII > > > main > > > > > branch, especially in MdePkg/Include/Protocol/MemoryAcceptance.h. > > > > > > > > > > Ok. Reading through the bug (comment 53) it looks like Intel's take > > > > > on > > > > > this is that it will simply not be needed long-term. > > > > > > > > > > How about adding it to > OvmfPkg/Include/Protocol/MemoryAcceptance.h > > > > > then? > > > > > > > > > > It surely will be very useful short-term. If it turns out that lazy > > > > > accept support indeed becomes a standard feature we might drop > this > > > > > in 3-5 years. Or promote it to MdePkg should that not be the case. > > > > > > > > > > take care, > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#98473): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/98473 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/96236145/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
