We could create our own fork under the <https://github.com/tianocore> organization. It does not require much extra maintenance or monitoring, in my opinion. We only need to advance our fork to the

- Looks good; just a typo in the example: "edk2-stable201111.01" should use 2020, not 2011. - I agree with Liming that stable branches should have a predefined lifetime. Keeping stable branches

Sounds good to me as well, thanks! Laszlo

Hello, We have had at least three incidents in the last year where the link to the cmocka submodule in the UnitTestFrameworkPkg has not been available, and this impacted the EDK II CI system. The

Hello, The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3111 https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226 This bug is also considered a critical

Hi Leif, Thank you for the feedback. I will send a revised RFC soon. I will discuss with Liming in the Tianocore bug scrub this evening. Mike

Makes sense. Let's go with the branch. Mike: yes, that was what I was suggesting wrt cherry-picking and pushing. Best Regards, Leif

FWIW, we tried both branches and tags in Mu, and have gotten more mileage out of branches. We will still do tags periodically (to establish a point at which all the sub repos were put through a full

Hi Leif, I think you are suggesting that a local branch could be created from edk2-stable202011 and the 2 commits cherry-picked onto that local branch and then create a tag on that local branch

Hi Mike, This looks fine to me. I will add a potential tweak that I won't strongly advocate for, but think should be considered: We don't technically need a branch for this; a tag could be

Hello, The following bug has been fixed on edk2/master https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3111 https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/1226 This bug is also considered a critical

Besides document, we filed below EDKII Bugzilla during code revisit: 3087 EDK2 Code unassigned@... UNCO --- TCG: EFI_EXIT_BOOT_SERVICES_INVOCATION is not recorded when ExitBootService

Responsive to Jiewen's message below one can find "Understanding the Trusted Boot Chain Implementation" at the following links: HTML:

Currently, RngDxe in SecurityPkg only supports Intel, with RdRand support. This RFC is to start a discussion about adding support for ARM. I have a Git branch with support for the optional ARMv8.5

Maybe you can upload the content to https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/files/Designs, where we hold the design review ppt, etc. I assume we want to discuss below two APIs implementation, right? 1)

Hi Sami, JPGs work, but preferably published in a location where they're unlikely to be deleted, and posted as URLs. https://app.diagrams.net/ doesn't require a licensed application to edit, and can

Hi All, I am working on the TRNG FW API interface and will share more details for the discussion soon. We had some thoughts about streamlining the RngDxe implementations and would like to share some

There is also the TRNG FW API, which is an architected SMC firmware interface: https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0098/latest/ ________________________________ Sent: Tuesday, December 8,

Good suggestion. Thanks Dick. Vincent and I have plan to refresh our TPM2 whitepaper recently. We will definitely take it into consideration, to add more detail on describing the EDK2 intent and