Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Dandan Bi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1865 bytes --]

Hi Kun,

I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they are sharing codes now.
And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help clarify following questions ? Thanks in advance.


  1.  Do you have the use case to leverage FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM performance data now?
  2.  Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to collect Standalone MM performance data and report the data to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the SmmCorePerformanceLib used for SMM core?
  3.  I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to remove them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.


Change:
SMM performance data collection now:

  1.  SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status code.
  2.  DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance data and allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don't need to get the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and register SMI handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if there is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.


Thanks,
Dandan

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 12521 bytes --]

Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Kun Qin]

Hi Dandan,

Thanks for letting me know. I added Bret and Sean to the thread for 
broader view in our scope.

But currently our StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data to 
FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module.

Is the idea to centralize the performance report collection job to 
SmmCorePerformanceLib and remove the FirmwarePerformance**Mm driver? Is 
there any plan to support a Standalone instance once the traditional MM 
version is functional?

Thanks,
Kun


On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
> Hi Kun,
> 
> I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also 
> update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they are 
> sharing codes now.
> 
> And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help clarify 
> following questions ? Thanks in advance.
> 
>  1. Do you have the use case to leverage
>     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM
>     performance data now?
>  2. Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to collect
>     Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
>     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the SmmCorePerformanceLib used
>     for SMM core?
>  3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to
>     SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove
>     them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> 
> If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data to 
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to remove 
> them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
> 
> Change:
> 
> SMM performance data collection now:
> 
>  1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
>     report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
>     code. **
>  2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
>     FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance data and
>     allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
> 
> Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib 
> communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM 
> performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don’t need to get 
> the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and register SMI 
> handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
> 
> For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if there 
> is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dandan
> 
> 

Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Ni, Ray]

It looks like a good topic to discuss in TianoCore Open Design meeting😊

Question to Dandan's proposal: Does it cause any conflict (or help) when standalone mm is launched from PEI?

Thanks,
Ray

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Kun Qin
> Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 6:49 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Bi, Dandan <dandan.bi@intel.com>; kun.q@outlook.com
> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang@intel.com>; gaoliming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Yao,
> Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> 
> Hi Dandan,
> 
> Thanks for letting me know. I added Bret and Sean to the thread for
> broader view in our scope.
> 
> But currently our StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data to
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module.
> 
> Is the idea to centralize the performance report collection job to
> SmmCorePerformanceLib and remove the FirmwarePerformance**Mm driver? Is
> there any plan to support a Standalone instance once the traditional MM
> version is functional?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kun
> 
> 
> On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
> > Hi Kun,
> >
> > I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also
> > update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they are
> > sharing codes now.
> >
> > And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help clarify
> > following questions ? Thanks in advance.
> >
> >  1. Do you have the use case to leverage
> >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM
> >     performance data now?
> >  2. Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to collect
> >     Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
> >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the SmmCorePerformanceLib used
> >     for SMM core?
> >  3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to
> >     SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove
> >     them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> >
> > If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data to
> > FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to remove
> > them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
> >
> > Change:
> >
> > SMM performance data collection now:
> >
> >  1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
> >     report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
> >     code. **
> >  2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
> >     FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance data and
> >     allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
> >
> > Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib
> > communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM
> > performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don’t need to get
> > the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and register SMI
> > handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
> >
> > For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if there
> > is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dandan
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Dandan Bi]

Hi Ray,

I think for now it will not cause any issue when standalone mm is launched.
As the functionality of collecting StandaloneMm performance data itself is missing in Edk2. 
So, it's ok to remove the related logic in FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now.

But later if we want to collect the StandaloneMm performance data, we should add the support in Edk2 like what SmmPerformanceLib/SmmCorePerformanceLib have done for SMM.


Thanks,
Dandan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 9:42 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; kuqin12@gmail.com; Bi, Dandan
> <dandan.bi@intel.com>; kun.q@outlook.com
> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang@intel.com>;
> gaoliming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Yao, Jiewen
> <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>;
> 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> 
> It looks like a good topic to discuss in TianoCore Open Design meeting😊
> 
> Question to Dandan's proposal: Does it cause any conflict (or help) when
> standalone mm is launched from PEI?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ray
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Kun
> Qin
> > Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 6:49 AM
> > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Bi, Dandan <dandan.bi@intel.com>;
> > kun.q@outlook.com
> > Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J
> > <jian.j.wang@intel.com>; gaoliming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Yao,
> > Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Bret Barkelew
> > <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; 'Sean Brogan'
> > <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> >
> > Hi Dandan,
> >
> > Thanks for letting me know. I added Bret and Sean to the thread for
> > broader view in our scope.
> >
> > But currently our StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data
> > to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module.
> >
> > Is the idea to centralize the performance report collection job to
> > SmmCorePerformanceLib and remove the FirmwarePerformance**Mm
> driver?
> > Is there any plan to support a Standalone instance once the
> > traditional MM version is functional?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kun
> >
> >
> > On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
> > > Hi Kun,
> > >
> > > I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also
> > > update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they
> > > are sharing codes now.
> > >
> > > And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help
> > > clarify following questions ? Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > >  1. Do you have the use case to leverage
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM
> > >     performance data now?
> > >  2. Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to
> collect
> > >     Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the
> SmmCorePerformanceLib used
> > >     for SMM core?
> > >  3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm
> to
> > >     SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove
> > >     them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> > >
> > > If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data
> > > to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to
> > > remove them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
> > >
> > > Change:
> > >
> > > SMM performance data collection now:
> > >
> > >  1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
> > >     report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
> > >     code. **
> > >  2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance
> data and
> > >     allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
> > >
> > > Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib
> > > communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM
> > > performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don’t need
> to
> > > get the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and
> register
> > > SMI handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
> > >
> > > For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if
> > > there is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Dandan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> >

Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Dandan Bi]

Hi Kun,

Thank you for the information.

Yes, the idea is to centralize the SMM performance report collection job to SmmCorePerformanceLib, and DxeCorePerformanceLib could communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib for all SMM performance data rather than through FirmwarePerformance**Mm driver.
But we will not remove FirmwarePerformance**Mm driver,  just remove the code logic related to **MM performance data which will be covered by **mmCorePerformanceLib.
FirmwarePerformance**Mm driver will still collect some performance data in S3 like the S3SuspendStart, S3SuspendEnd.  We don't introduce any incompatible change.

If now StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module, I think it should be ok to remove the handling of **MM performance data both in FirmwarePerformanceSmm and FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
For SMM, the removed logic will be handled by SmmCorePerformanceLib
For StandaloneMm, I think we can submit an Edk2 feature to add a StandaloneMmCore instance with the same functionality of SmmCorePerformanceLib. As now the functionality of collecting StandaloneMm performance data is missing in Edk2.
 


Thanks,	
Dandan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kun Qin <kuqin12@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 6:49 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Bi, Dandan <dandan.bi@intel.com>;
> kun.q@outlook.com
> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu@intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang@intel.com>;
> gaoliming <gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn>; Yao, Jiewen
> <jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>;
> 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> 
> Hi Dandan,
> 
> Thanks for letting me know. I added Bret and Sean to the thread for broader
> view in our scope.
> 
> But currently our StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data to
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module.
> 
> Is the idea to centralize the performance report collection job to
> SmmCorePerformanceLib and remove the FirmwarePerformance**Mm
> driver? Is there any plan to support a Standalone instance once the
> traditional MM version is functional?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kun
> 
> 
> On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
> > Hi Kun,
> >
> > I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also
> > update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they
> are
> > sharing codes now.
> >
> > And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help clarify
> > following questions ? Thanks in advance.
> >
> >  1. Do you have the use case to leverage
> >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM
> >     performance data now?
> >  2. Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to collect
> >     Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
> >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the SmmCorePerformanceLib
> used
> >     for SMM core?
> >  3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to
> >     SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove
> >     them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> >
> > If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data to
> > FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to remove
> > them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
> >
> > Change:
> >
> > SMM performance data collection now:
> >
> >  1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
> >     report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
> >     code. **
> >  2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
> >     FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance data
> and
> >     allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
> >
> > Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib
> > communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM
> > performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don't need to
> get
> > the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and register
> SMI
> > handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
> >
> > For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if
> > there is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dandan
> >
> >