On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 03:08:38PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > Am 4. September 2021 15:01:11 MESZ schrieb Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com>: > >On Sat, Sep 04, 2021 at 11:56:47AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > >> Dear Tom, > >> > >> The following changes since commit > >> 94509b79b13e69c209199af0757afbde8d2ebd6d: > >> > >> btrfs: Use default subvolume as filesystem root (2021-09-01 10:11:24 > >> -0400) > >> > >> are available in the Git repository at: > >> > >> https://source.denx.de/u-boot/custodians/u-boot-efi.git > >> tags/efi-2021-10-rc4 > >> > >> for you to fetch changes up to 1dfa494610c5469cc28cf1f8538abf4be6c00324: > >> > >> efi_loader: fix efi_tcg2_hash_log_extend_event() parameter check > >> (2021-09-04 09:15:09 +0200) > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Pull request for efi-2021-10-rc4 > >> > >> Documentation: > >> > >> Remove invalid reference to configuration variable in UEFI doc > >> > >> UEFI: > >> > >> Parameter checks for the EFI_TCG2_PROTOCOL > >> Improve support of preseeding UEFI variables. > >> Correct the calculation of the size of loaded images. > >> Allow for UEFI images with zero VirtualSize > >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- > >> Heinrich Schuchardt (5): > >> efi_loader: sections with zero VirtualSize > >> efi_loader: rounding of image size > >> efi_loader: don't load signature database from file > >> efi_loader: efi_auth_var_type for AuditMode, DeployedMode > >> efi_loader: correct determination of secure boot state > >> > >> Masahisa Kojima (3): > >> efi_loader: add missing parameter check for EFI_TCG2_PROTOCOL api > >> efi_loader: fix boot_service_capability_min calculation > >> efi_loader: fix efi_tcg2_hash_log_extend_event() parameter check > > > >And I don't see Simon's revert in here either. And he asked you about > >that yesterday: > >https://lore.kernel.org/r/capnjgz3erdjf0jb9s-cjk6y+feuyrywf0hnkf2trib4dr4u...@mail.gmail.com/ > > > >So at this point, are you asserting there is nothing to revert? > > Never. Simons "revert" is breaking functionality. The concept for suporting > blobs in devicetrees supplied by a prior bootstage has not been defined yet.
And to be clearer, reverting something that was introduced in one rc in a later rc isn't breaking functionality. U-Boot releases (well, the non-rc ones for sure) are on a very regular schedule. External projects may not depend on some feature introduced at -rcN unless they're willing to accept that some changes could happen before release. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
