HCL - MS_7D25

[Michael Wikman]

[Sven Semmler]

Thank you Michael for your HCL report, which is [online](https://www.qubes-os.org/hcl/#msi_ms-7d25_i7-12700k_alder-lake_integrated-graphics-uhd-770-geforce-gtx-1080-ti) now.

I assume no comments means everything is working?

/Sven

--
public key: https://www.svensemmler.org/2A632C537D744BC7.asc
fingerprint: DA59 75C9 ABC4 0C83 3B2F 620B 2A63 2C53 7D74 4BC7

[Michał Żygowski]

Hi Sven,

The YAML file in the attachment has the following BIOS version:
"Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v1.0.0"
but the HCL site indicates entirely different version: "Dasharo v1.0.0".

Could you please correct it? Thanks.

On 6/28/22 16:47, Sven Semmler wrote:
> Thank you Michael for your HCL report, which is
> [online](https://www.qubes-os.org/hcl/#msi_ms-7d25_i7-12700k_alder-lake_integrated-graphics-uhd-770-geforce-gtx-1080-ti)
> now.
>
> I assume no comments means everything is working?
>
> /Sven
>

Best regards,
--
Michał Żygowski
Firmware Engineer
GPG: 6B5BA214D21FCEB2
https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com

[Sven Semmler]

Hi Michał,

I am trying to keep the BIOS field as short as possible. Could you explain please why "Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v1.0.0" is an "entirely different version" from "Dasharo v1.0.0"?

I've previously left "Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v0.4.0" unchanged in the case of the MS-7D25 reported by @renehoj. So there is definitely an inconsistency here that needs addressing. I've shortened BIOS entries for "Heads" to just it and the relevant version number for the same reason many times.

Why is the "(coreboot+UEFI)" part important / not redundant? Isn't Dasharo an UEFI implementation on top of coreboot?

In any case, I made the change you requested but would appreciate some background if you could.

[Michał Żygowski]

Hi Sven,

On 6/29/22 03:01, Sven Semmler wrote:
> Hi Michał,
>
> I am trying to keep the BIOS field as short as possible. Could you
> explain please why "Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v1.0.0" is an "entirely
> different version" from "Dasharo v1.0.0"?
>
> I've previously left "Dasharo (coreboot+UEFI) v0.4.0" unchanged in the
> case of the MS-7D25 reported by @renehoj. So there is definitely an
> inconsistency here that needs addressing. I've shortened BIOS entries
> for "Heads" to just it and the relevant version number for the same
> reason many times.
>
> Why is the "(coreboot+UEFI)" part important / not redundant? Isn't
> Dasharo an UEFI implementation on top of coreboot?

Dasharo isn't only an UEFI implementation. It may come in various other
flavors like (coreboot+SeaBIOS) or (coreboot+heads), etc. More
information about the versioning can be found here:
https://docs.dasharo.com/dev-proc/smbios-rules/#bios-information-type-0

Secondly inconsistency in the BIOS version naming on the HCL site could
introduce confusion or doubts if it is really the same firmware.

>
> In any case, I made the change you requested but would appreciate some
> background if you could.
>
> /Sven
>

Thank you.