[edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 13/14] ArmPkg: Turn off spellcheck audit mode

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 at 03:46, Michael Kubacki
<mikuback at linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ard,
>
> I believe you're referencing the points in this mail, right?
> https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/97433
>
> To be clear about why that was considered dismissive and passive
> aggressive, these sentences:
>
> "I would also like to point out that all this focus on code aesthetics
> that do not contribute to the object code at all is distracting from
> things that would actually improve the safety and robustness of the
> code."
>
> "So if you are interested, and want to improve EDK2 at a level that
> actually makes the shipping code more robust, we could collaborate on
> this (PE spec change, UEFI spec change, EDK2 and Linux changes both
> for x86 and arm64[0]) so that firmware runs with indirect branch
> protection enabled when the hardware supports it."
>
> Read as "this is unimportant/distracting so do this more important stuff
> instead".
>

Fair enough. It was never my intent to be disrespectful, though.

> This may not been what you meant to convey, but it doesn't set the best
> foundation for collaboration on the topic.
>

True.

> I understand that there will always be functionally impacting work that
> has tangible value over supporting changes like correctly spelling
> words. Though, it's not purely aesthetic, language translators and
> screen readers function more reliably if words are spelled correctly. In
> any case, improving reading comprehension and functionality are not
> mutually exclusive.
>
> I think we're meeting on the topic with two different sets of
> expectations that naturally conflict.
>
> 1. You're not happy with the current process used for spell checking in
> TianoCore
> 2. I would like to prevent and/or minimize future patches that only fix
> typos (check in CI)
> 3. We both believe fixing spelling errors should be simple
>
> (1) is a valid opinion to have but because of (1), I cannot enable (2).
> Because of (1), (3) is not true as the infrastructure needs to be
> revamped, which I do not personally have bandwidth to do at the moment.
>

None of this would be problematic for me if I had the discretion as a
long time maintainer to override/ignore certain CI errors. I don't see
how this is fundamentally different from adding known typos to the
exception list.

> My initial understanding was that the TianoCore process had further
> discussion and agreement than it seems occurred so I thought we (as a
> community) were in position to simply follow it and reduce the typo
> count. Without (2), the typos fixed can reappear (the next commit could
> reintroduce the same typo without enforcement) so, in my opinion, it's
> not worth the time and effort to manage the patch series in that case.
> That's why I revoked the series.
>

Fair enough.

> Your feedback is still valuable to the wider TianoCore Tools & CI group
> that meets weekly. It may be able to be addressed there.
>

Those tend to take place in the middle of the night for me, which is
why I rarely join those.

> On the topic of IBT/BTI, I agree that's useful. We probably need to have
> a dedicated thread on that to get more background on where you're at and
> then we can try to help where possible.
>
> Would you be open to a meeting to discuss that?
>

Yes, please. I'm in UTC+1, and my calendar is generally fairly empty,
so please feel free to set a time that works for you.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#98301): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/98301
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/95678218/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-