Hi Jiewen, Sounds strange, but new PRs in today all broken due to this issue, e.g.: https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5210 https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5268
I checked build log, it matched the description from Gerd: https://dev.azure.com/tianocore/11ea4a10-ac9f-4e5f-8b13-7def1f19d478/_apis/build/builds/114097/logs/350 2024-01-17T04:09:52.5996237Z INFO - /usr/bin/ld: DxeTpm2MeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin): in function `SanitizeEfiPartitionTableHeader': 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6010570Z INFO - (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `SanitizeEfiPartitionTableHeader'; DxeTpmMeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin):(.text+0x0): first defined here 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6020435Z INFO - /usr/bin/ld: DxeTpm2MeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin): in function `SanitizeEfiPartitionTableHeader': 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6030987Z INFO - (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `SanitizePrimaryHeaderAllocationSize'; DxeTpmMeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin):(.text+0x0): first defined here 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6040167Z INFO - /usr/bin/ld: DxeTpm2MeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin): in function `SanitizeEfiPartitionTableHeader': 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6050625Z INFO - (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `SanitizePrimaryHeaderGptEventSize'; DxeTpmMeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin):(.text+0x0): first defined here 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6061966Z INFO - /usr/bin/ld: DxeTpm2MeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin): in function `SanitizeEfiPartitionTableHeader': 2024-01-17T04:09:52.6072661Z INFO - (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `SanitizePeImageEventSize'; DxeTpmMeasureBootLibSanitization.obj (symbol from plugin):(.text+0x0): first defined here 2024-01-17T04:10:12.9532147Z INFO - build.py... 2024-01-17T04:10:12.9593220Z INFO - : error 7000: Failed to execute command 2024-01-17T04:10:23.2054653Z INFO - build.py... 2024-01-17T04:10:23.2055014Z INFO - : error F002: Failed to build module 2024-01-17T04:10:23.2055379Z INFO - /__w/1/s/MdeModulePkg/Universal/SecurityStubDxe/SecurityStubDxe.inf [X64, GCC5, DEBUG] -----Original Message----- From: Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 4:09 PM To: Li, Yi1 <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; Douglas Flick [MSFT] <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/6] SECURITY PATCHES TCBZ4117 & TCBZ4118 Please check https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5264. It is merged after pass CI. May I know where you see PR CI builds are broken? Thank you Yao, Jiewen > -----Original Message----- > From: Li, Yi1 <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 3:21 PM > To: [email protected]; Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]>; Gerd > Hoffmann <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Douglas Flick [MSFT] > <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/6] SECURITY PATCHES TCBZ4117 & > TCBZ4118 > > Hi Jiewen, > > All EDK2 PR CI builds of OvmfPkg are broken due to this issue. > Maybe we didn't have enough time to wait feedback and should fix the > CI issue first. > > Regards, > Yi > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Yao, > Jiewen > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 10:38 PM > To: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; Douglas Flick [MSFT] > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/6] SECURITY PATCHES TCBZ4117 & > TCBZ4118 > > Sure. Let's start from OVMF. > > We have leaf enough time for feedback, but I see no comment from other people. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2024 10:35 PM > > To: [email protected]; Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected]; Douglas Flick [MSFT] > > <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 0/6] SECURITY PATCHES TCBZ4117 > > & > > TCBZ4118 > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 01:30:43PM +0000, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > > Gerd > > > I have merged this patch set today. > > > > > > I am fine to remove TPM1.2 in OVMF because of the known security > limitation. > > > > I was thinking about the complete edk2 code base not only OVMF. > > > > But I can surely start with OVMF. Maybe it is the only platform > > affected because on physical hardware you usually know whenever TPM > > 1.2 or TPM 2.0 is present so there is no need to include both. > > > > take care, > > Gerd > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#113937): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/113937 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/103675434/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
