RE: [PATCH v3] Use EfiACPIReclaimMemory for ESRT

[Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Demi Marie Obenour <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Use EfiACPIReclaimMemory for ESRT
> 
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 07:37:53AM +0000, Henry Wang wrote:
> > Hi Julien,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Use EfiACPIReclaimMemory for ESRT
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Demi Marie Obenour <demi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >>
> > > >> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > > >>
> > > >>> Should this be included in 4.17?  It is a bug fix for a feature new to
> > > >>> 4.17, so I suspect yes, but it is ultimately up to Henry Wang.  The 
> > > >>> code
> > > >>> is identical to v2, but I have improved the commit message.
> > > >>
> > > >> It may be too late now, looking at the state of the tree. Henry, 
> > > >> Julien?
> > > >
> > > > Like I said in v2, I don't object the change if you would like to 
> > > > include
> this
> > > patch
> > > > to 4.17, so if you are sure this patch is safe and want to commit it, 
> > > > feel
> free
> > > to add:
> > > >
> > > > Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Since we also need to commit:
> > > > "[PATCH for-4.17] SUPPORT.md: Define support lifetime" so from my
> side
> > > > I am no problem. Julien might have different opinion though, if Julien
> > > object
> > > > the change I would like to respect his opinion and leave this patch
> > > uncommitted.
> > >
> > > I have committed it after SUPPORT.md. So if for some reasons we are
> seen
> > > any issues with Osstest, then I can tag the tree without this patch
> >
> > This is a great solution :)
> >
> > > (that said, I would rather prefer if we have staging-4.17 == stable-4.17).
> >
> > Looks like now staging-4.17 == stable-4.17 now, with this patch pushed.
> > So we are ready to tag.
> 
> And it turns out that I botched the initial patch, sorry.  (I forgot to
> handle the multiboot2 case.)
> 
> I understand if it is too late for stable-4.17, but it ought to make
> stable 4.17.1 as it was simply omitted from the initial patch series.

I don't think this patch will make it today so I would suggest we still follow
what Julien planned yesterday. Also I think this is also consistent with the
release management guideline.

Kind regards,
Henry


> --
> Sincerely,
> Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)
> Invisible Things Lab