Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v1 1/1] MdePkg/BaseCacheMaintenanceLib: RV64 replace asserts with logs

["Dhaval Sharma" <dhaval@rivosinc.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1795 bytes --]

"The CpuDxe interface will be the wrapper." Yes, of course. It needs to be
added. I was just saying that maybe any CMO checking is not required there
as cmo library will take care of it.

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:24 PM Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 11:42:57AM +0530, Dhaval Sharma wrote:
> > Sunil,
> > I thought "WriteBackDataCacheRange not supported" is more explicit over
> > "CMO not available".
> >
> Okay.
>
> > @Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com> For the example you mentioned,
> is
> > your concern more about someone not being able to notice the problem
> (that
> > the system is non-coherent) at the time of development and later ending
> up
> > with corrupted data during production? And you are suggesting that an
> > Assert helps address that problem by making that problem more visible to
> > the developer and a verbose warning does not?
> >
> > I can create a patch for CpuFlushCpuDataCache but I think we should avoid
> > CMO based return in there. Because in case of InvalidateDataCacheRange we
> > have an alternate implementation of fence in the absence of CMO. So it is
> > better to let riscvcache decide the right implementation.
> >
> The CpuDxe interface will be the wrapper. See Arm's implementation.
> Since CMO support is added now, the CpuDxe interface should be updated.
>
> Thanks,
> Sunil
>


-- 
Thanks!
=D


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#114302): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/114302
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/103805230/7686176
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2821 bytes --]