Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] UefiCpuPkg/CpuFeature: Introduce First to indicate 1st unit.

["Ni, Ray" <ray.ni@intel.com>]

> 
> Need some patches to update individual InitializeFunc() for features.
> These patches can be a separated patch series.
> 
Yes.

> >
> > The patch adds a new field Fist to indicate the CPU's location in
> 
> "Firt" should be "First".
Will fix the typo in next version of patch or pushing.

> > +  //
> > +  // Set First.Die/Tile/Module for each thread assuming:
> > +  //  single Die under each package, single Tile under each Die, single
> Module
> > under each Tile
> 
> This assumption needs to be addressed in this or a separated patch series.

The assumption will be fixed after the below changes are merged to trunk.
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-staging/tree/cpu/6-level


> > +  for (PackageIndex = 0; PackageIndex < CpuStatus->PackageCount;
> > PackageIndex++) {
> > +    //
> > +    // Set First.Core for each thread in the first core of each package.
> > +    //
> > +    First = MAX_UINT32;
> > +    for (ProcessorNumber = 0; ProcessorNumber < NumberOfCpus;
> > ProcessorNumber++) {
> > +      Location = &CpuFeaturesData-
> > >InitOrder[ProcessorNumber].CpuInfo.ProcessorInfo.Location;
> > +      if (Location->Package == PackageIndex) {
> 
> Here the code is assuming Location->Package starts from 0 and consecutive.

CpuStatus->PackageCount is assigned in CpuInitDataInitialize():
>  CpuStatus->PackageCount    = Package + 1;
>  CpuStatus->MaxCoreCount    = Core + 1;
>  CpuStatus->MaxThreadCount  = Thread + 1;
So PackageCount actually is the value of max package ID + 1.
With that, the code change isn't assuming Location->Package starts from 0 and consecutive.

> 
> Here the code is assuming Location->Package and Location->Core start from
> 0 and consecutive.
> We could not have this assumption, this patch is to resolve this assumption.
Similarly, The code change above isn't assuming Location->Core starts from 0 and consecutive.

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Star
>