From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.groups.io (mail02.groups.io [66.175.222.108]) by spool.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 214C8D80CAA for ; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 12:55:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=aRoIwxrf+ZyzcYGx2lXicIvdb2TikeyEV1Mt2SWm5o4=; c=relaxed/simple; d=groups.io; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:Precedence:List-Subscribe:List-Help:Sender:List-Id:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:Reply-To:List-Unsubscribe-Post:List-Unsubscribe:Content-Language:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; s=20140610; t=1708865699; v=1; b=E9+LPo7FV88p6LIWqyOjMXRN5eZ9gZl3xpeS7Mel+2l+Tc/3P7NuYGxKOKa10kpFttk8pAb2 lFd3c9xccCjTqOvtVGd5HTp8BIluS9xjFJAIBokeM/Rid/0PJxt7EyJbb5JGFGiyRCWpXA5zpNA /2ap16Indm0Z9xyiYxp4jr4Q= X-Received: by 127.0.0.2 with SMTP id 5pbDYY7687511xdJUXGEoeOv; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 04:54:59 -0800 X-Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.38628.1708865699014233205 for ; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 04:54:59 -0800 X-Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-116-WvbNz7D6PiSI6qnCG2NPJA-1; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 07:54:54 -0500 X-MC-Unique: WvbNz7D6PiSI6qnCG2NPJA-1 X-Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6774383B828; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 12:54:54 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from [10.39.192.57] (unknown [10.39.192.57]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F0792166B33; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 12:54:53 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <8963beb1-7272-dc5d-69e5-0366956bbe4a@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2024 13:54:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 4/5] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add support for multiple HOBs to MpInitLibInitialize To: "Ni, Ray" , Gerd Hoffmann Cc: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , Oliver Steffen , "Kumar, Rahul R" References: <20240220174939.1288689-1-kraxel@redhat.com> <20240220174939.1288689-5-kraxel@redhat.com> From: "Laszlo Ersek" In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.6 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Precedence: Bulk List-Subscribe: List-Help: Sender: devel@edk2.groups.io List-Id: Mailing-List: list devel@edk2.groups.io; contact devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Reply-To: devel@edk2.groups.io,lersek@redhat.com List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-Click List-Unsubscribe: X-Gm-Message-State: teIBCEi25U1Lkrh0H3lXbjctx7686176AA= Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-GND-Status: LEGIT Authentication-Results: spool.mail.gandi.net; dkim=pass header.d=groups.io header.s=20140610 header.b=E9+LPo7F; spf=pass (spool.mail.gandi.net: domain of bounce@groups.io designates 66.175.222.108 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bounce@groups.io; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), DKIM not aligned (relaxed)" header.from=redhat.com (policy=none) On 2/23/24 01:23, Ni, Ray wrote: > I prefer HOB instead of dynamic PCD. > And let's keep the new singleton HOB structure as an internal interface b= etween > PEI MpInitLib and DXE MpInitLib. Sounds good to me, thanks Laszlo >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gerd Hoffmann >> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 8:29 PM >> To: Laszlo Ersek >> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; Oliver Steffen ; Kumar, >> Rahul R ; Ni, Ray >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 4/5] UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Add suppo= rt >> for multiple HOBs to MpInitLibInitialize >> >> Hi, >> >>> The code looks otherwise OK, but I'm not happy that >>> WaitLoopExecutionMode (and StartupSignalValue) are replicated over all >>> the HOBs, just like in v1. IMO, that will only make it harder for other= s >>> to understand the code / data structures, and therefore it increases >>> technical debt. >>> >>> I understand that Ray is OK with that, so I won't try to block the >>> patch, but I'm not comfortable giving it an R-b myself, due to the >>> increase in technical debt. >> >> I can try to address that, but this certainly will be a separate >> patch. >> >> Given that the HOB structure is defined in locally in the library >> I assume this is considered private and there are no compatibility >> concerns when changing the structs? >> >> Any preference where the fields should be moved to? PCD? Separate >> HOB? Something else? >> >> take care, >> Gerd >=20 -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#115923): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/115923 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104472311/7686176 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io] -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-