Date   
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Laszlo Ersek · #149 ·
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] q35: implement 128K SMRAM at default SMBASE address By Laszlo Ersek · #148 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Andrew Fish <afish@...> · #147 ·
Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration Phase 1 By rebecca@... · #146 ·
Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration Phase 1 By Sean · #145 ·
Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] q35: lpc: allow to lock down 128K RAM at default SMBASE address By Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...> · #144 ·
[PATCH 2/2] tests: q35: MCH: add default SMBASE SMRAM lock test By Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...> · #143 ·
[PATCH 1/2] q35: implement 128K SMRAM at default SMBASE address By Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...> · #142 ·
[PATCH 0/2] q35: mch: allow to lock down 128K RAM at default SMBASE address By Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...> · #141 ·
Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration Phase 1 By rebecca@... · #140 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Ethin Probst · #139 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Rafael Machado <rafaelrodrigues.machado@...> · #138 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Rafael Machado <rafaelrodrigues.machado@...> · #137 ·
Re: [PATCH] q35: lpc: allow to lock down 128K RAM at default SMBASE address By Laszlo Ersek · #136 ·
Re: [RFC] Error reporting upon SecureBoot image validation failures? By Laszlo Ersek · #135 ·
[RFC] Error reporting upon SecureBoot image validation failures? By Aaron Young · #134 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Ethin Probst · #133 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Rafael Machado <rafaelrodrigues.machado@...> · #132 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Ethin Probst · #131 ·
Re: UEFI accessibility mandate By Ethin Probst · #130 ·
641 - 660 of 789