From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751482AbdFEJIC (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2017 05:08:02 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:35851 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751272AbdFEJIA (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Jun 2017 05:08:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 11:07:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , "H . Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Matt Fleming , Sai Praneeth Prakhya Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 00/13] First batch of EFI updates for v4.13 Message-ID: <20170605090755.6hf2b7hqgvfn44ao@gmail.com> References: <20170602135207.21708-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > (trim cc) > > On 2 June 2017 at 13:51, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > The following changes since commit 5ed02dbb497422bf225783f46e6eadd237d23d6b: > > > > Linux 4.12-rc3 (2017-05-28 17:20:53 -0700) > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git tags/efi-next > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 3acbd5a24ab9d9a82c56d9018f4d340fa574b91d: > > > > efi: arm: enable DMI/SMBIOS (2017-06-02 13:38:56 +0000) > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > First batch of EFI changes for v4.13: > > - rework the EFI capsule loader to allow for workarounds for non-compliant > > firmware to be implemented more easily and in a more self contained > > manner (Ard) > > - implement a capsule loader quirk for Quark X102x, which prepends a > > security header in a non-compliant way (Jan Kiszka) > > - enable SMBIOS/DMI support for the ARM architecture (Ard) > > - add EFI_PGT_DUMP support for x86_32 and kexec (Sai Praneeth) > > - some other cleanups > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Andy Lutomirski (1): > > x86/efi: Clean up efi CR3 save/restore > > > > Ard Biesheuvel (4): > > efi/capsule-loader: Use a cached copy of the capsule header > > efi/capsule-loader: Redirect calls to efi_capsule_setup_info via weak alias > > efi/capsule-loader: Use page addresses rather than struct page pointers > > efi: arm: enable DMI/SMBIOS > > > > Fabian Frederick (1): > > efi/capsule: Remove NULL test on kmap() > > > > Geliang Tang (1): > > efi/efi_test: Use memdup_user() helper > > > > Jan Kiszka (5): > > efi/capsule: Fix return code on failing kmap/vmap > > efi/capsule: Remove pr_debug on ENOMEM or EFAULT > > efi/capsule: Clean up pr_err/info messages > > efi/capsule: Adjust return type of efi_capsule_setup_info > > efi/capsule: Add support for Quark security header > > > > Sai Praneeth (1): > > x86/efi: Add EFI_PGT_DUMP support for x86_32 and kexec > > > > All, > > I just noticed that this patch lacks my signoff. This is due to the > fact that Matt queued this particular patch, and I didn't update the > branch to add my sob, so it is only signed off by Matt not me. > > How should we handle this now, and in the future? Matt and I share > maintainership responsibilities, and so everything that gets queued > into the EFI tree may be treated as signed off by either and/or the > both of us. For multi-maintainer trees that get pulled directly, this > is usually not an issue AFAIK, but given that Ingo is the one that > deals with EFI usually, and prefers to apply the patches individually, > this may get flagged as a missing signoff. So the root problem is that that's not the proper usage of SOB: SOB tracks the true propagation of patches, it's not an Acked-by tag. What should be added instead in such cases is an Acked-by or Reviewed-by from your co-maintainer when you apply the patch - and a SOB of yourself. That is how we are doing it in -tip: you'll see that 99% of the patches there get signed off by only one of the co-maintainers. > In any case, I am happy to respin the patches, re-sign the tag etc if this is > deemed necessary. It would be nice to fix your SOB flow: the maintainer who queues up a patch should add the SOB, and add an Acked-by of the co-maintainer if the co-maintainer agrees with the patch as well. The tree should typically not be rebased after that point (especially not by the other co-maintainer) - that's just indicative of a messy workflow. ( In rare circumstances we do double signoffs as well in -tip, when there's a _true_ patch flow between the maintainers, but it's the exception, not the rule. ) Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 00/13] First batch of EFI updates for v4.13 Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 11:07:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20170605090755.6hf2b7hqgvfn44ao@gmail.com> References: <20170602135207.21708-1-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: "linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Thomas Gleixner , "H . Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Matt Fleming , Sai Praneeth Prakhya List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org * Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > (trim cc) > > On 2 June 2017 at 13:51, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > The following changes since commit 5ed02dbb497422bf225783f46e6eadd237d23d6b: > > > > Linux 4.12-rc3 (2017-05-28 17:20:53 -0700) > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/efi/efi.git tags/efi-next > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 3acbd5a24ab9d9a82c56d9018f4d340fa574b91d: > > > > efi: arm: enable DMI/SMBIOS (2017-06-02 13:38:56 +0000) > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > First batch of EFI changes for v4.13: > > - rework the EFI capsule loader to allow for workarounds for non-compliant > > firmware to be implemented more easily and in a more self contained > > manner (Ard) > > - implement a capsule loader quirk for Quark X102x, which prepends a > > security header in a non-compliant way (Jan Kiszka) > > - enable SMBIOS/DMI support for the ARM architecture (Ard) > > - add EFI_PGT_DUMP support for x86_32 and kexec (Sai Praneeth) > > - some other cleanups > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Andy Lutomirski (1): > > x86/efi: Clean up efi CR3 save/restore > > > > Ard Biesheuvel (4): > > efi/capsule-loader: Use a cached copy of the capsule header > > efi/capsule-loader: Redirect calls to efi_capsule_setup_info via weak alias > > efi/capsule-loader: Use page addresses rather than struct page pointers > > efi: arm: enable DMI/SMBIOS > > > > Fabian Frederick (1): > > efi/capsule: Remove NULL test on kmap() > > > > Geliang Tang (1): > > efi/efi_test: Use memdup_user() helper > > > > Jan Kiszka (5): > > efi/capsule: Fix return code on failing kmap/vmap > > efi/capsule: Remove pr_debug on ENOMEM or EFAULT > > efi/capsule: Clean up pr_err/info messages > > efi/capsule: Adjust return type of efi_capsule_setup_info > > efi/capsule: Add support for Quark security header > > > > Sai Praneeth (1): > > x86/efi: Add EFI_PGT_DUMP support for x86_32 and kexec > > > > All, > > I just noticed that this patch lacks my signoff. This is due to the > fact that Matt queued this particular patch, and I didn't update the > branch to add my sob, so it is only signed off by Matt not me. > > How should we handle this now, and in the future? Matt and I share > maintainership responsibilities, and so everything that gets queued > into the EFI tree may be treated as signed off by either and/or the > both of us. For multi-maintainer trees that get pulled directly, this > is usually not an issue AFAIK, but given that Ingo is the one that > deals with EFI usually, and prefers to apply the patches individually, > this may get flagged as a missing signoff. So the root problem is that that's not the proper usage of SOB: SOB tracks the true propagation of patches, it's not an Acked-by tag. What should be added instead in such cases is an Acked-by or Reviewed-by from your co-maintainer when you apply the patch - and a SOB of yourself. That is how we are doing it in -tip: you'll see that 99% of the patches there get signed off by only one of the co-maintainers. > In any case, I am happy to respin the patches, re-sign the tag etc if this is > deemed necessary. It would be nice to fix your SOB flow: the maintainer who queues up a patch should add the SOB, and add an Acked-by of the co-maintainer if the co-maintainer agrees with the patch as well. The tree should typically not be rebased after that point (especially not by the other co-maintainer) - that's just indicative of a messy workflow. ( In rare circumstances we do double signoffs as well in -tip, when there's a _true_ patch flow between the maintainers, but it's the exception, not the rule. ) Thanks, Ingo