From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124])
 by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web09.2411.1614891324376787692
 for <devel@edk2.groups.io>;
 Thu, 04 Mar 2021 12:55:24 -0800
Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io;
 dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=OKNTb9T/;
 spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 216.205.24.124, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1614891323;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=bfvSc/3IUAwefq/1sJZQypyMajzVXqsr4yBaqz998oA=;
	b=OKNTb9T/fMks58RjPXxmmRjVjkHi+IXt/JrJxcaUu7BW8jz+6qTKB5DMfHXyf7kMhyXdHu
	/x9nPRP2QMDkUlJwqg4jbjWMLmt2uih71a5FCEfGhM18h20AswMfJfehihaiy5Ib5D9nx4
	J47H3rORL7+6DmLjT3R8DqzHxfpaFn4=
Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com
 [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id
 us-mta-303-pSo1_s6QPAWZgHPSyHWrDw-1; Thu, 04 Mar 2021 15:55:19 -0500
X-MC-Unique: pSo1_s6QPAWZgHPSyHWrDw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97E2B108BD06;
	Thu,  4 Mar 2021 20:55:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-112-76.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.76])
	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5972D179B3;
	Thu,  4 Mar 2021 20:55:16 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Question about Smm code / StandaloneMmPkg
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, tigerliu@zhaoxin.com,
 "Kinney, Michael D" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>, Kun Qin <kun.q@outlook.com>
References: <13606bd7c807495abdfd4b908bcc30dd@zhaoxin.com>
From: "Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <080ea8cb-30a5-2a98-832c-f918c97c9f5c@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 21:55:15 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <13606bd7c807495abdfd4b908bcc30dd@zhaoxin.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11
Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com;
	auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=lersek@redhat.com
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Adding Kun Qin; a comment below:

On 03/04/21 09:34, Tiger Liu(BJ-RD) wrote:
> Dear All:
> I have a few questions about Smm code and StandaloneMmPkg.
> 
> Take X86 Arch cpu as example:
> 1. Smm infrastructure code is implemented in MdeModulePkg\Core\PiSmmCore
>    But it's a traditional smm mode, used launched in UEFI DXE Phase.
> 
> A_Tour_Beyond_BIOS_Launching_Standalone_SMM_Drivers_in_PEI_using_the_EFI_Developer_Kit_II.pdf
> ----> This doc introduced a standalone smm mode.
> 
> PI Spec introduces a MM concept, it's arch independent.
> 
> So, I have below questions:
> 1. Will X86 SMM code implementation be migrated to MM concept code base?
> 2. StandaloneMmPkg is a MM reference implementation, is it arch independent?
> 3. The above doc mentioned launching SMM drivers in PEI,  is it also implemented in StandaloneMmPkg?

Please see (also) the following thread:

  [edk2-rfc] [RFC]
  Support Both MM Traditional and Standalone Drivers with One MM Core

  https://edk2.groups.io/g/rfc/message/430

Thanks
Laszlo


> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 保密声明：
> 本邮件含有保密或专有信息，仅供指定收件人使用。严禁对本邮件或其内容做任何未经授权的查阅、使用、复制或转发。
> CONFIDENTIAL NOTE:
> This email contains confidential or legally privileged information and is for the sole use of its intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use, copying or forwarding of this email or the content of this email is strictly prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>