From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4481E8857 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:48:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E287A5E1 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:47:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:47:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 601AA47B1D for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:47:57 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4ec3e6ba-3d2d-7bc8-ccaa-344f3b778d69@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:47:56 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0 To: Thomas Lamprecht , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20230830155001.2249173-1-s.hanreich@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Stefan Hanreich In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.828 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years NICE_REPLY_A -1.242 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH edk2-firmware v2] update to edk2-stable202308 X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 12:48:28 -0000 On 8/31/23 14:39, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > Am 30/08/2023 um 17:50 schrieb Stefan Hanreich: >> * Removed 0001-OvmfPkg-PlatformInitLib-limit-phys-bits-to-46.patch >> since it has been included upstream since commit c1e85376 [1]. >> >> * Updated the patch >> Revert-ArmVirtPkg-make-EFI_LOADER_DATA-non-executabl so it applies >> again. >> >> * had to increase FD_SIZE to 4M for the x64 build as otherwise the >> package wouldn't build due to the size of the resulting image > > I mean new versions are great and what not, but is there a reason why you > send this update now? Maybe fix some issue our users face? If so, it'd be > great if you could record that here. > I've been trying to reproduce an issue one of our users is facing and wanted to check whether newer firmware versions trigger the issue as well. Currently, this issue seems fixed with the newer firmware although it's hard to say since there is no definite reproducer. Since I had to build the newer version for that I figured why not put it on the mailinglist as well after a short talk with Fiona. > isn't this breaking live-migration and snapshot rollback compat though > for old machines using that? > > For new ones we only use 4 MB images anyway, so if, I'd rather move a > existing build for 2MB images in some pve-edk2-firmware-legacy package > for backward compat and then drop building those variants here completely. > > Would be great if you could check qemu-server history for when the 2MB > SMM ones where used, if at all, could help deciding things. > I will check and perform some tests regarding that and report back. > bumps should be separate commits and restricted to plain version and > changelog metadata, like here it'd only touch d/changelog. > > Also, it's most of the time best to let the release team handle the > bumps. duly noted.