On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 10:10 AM Sunil V L wrote: > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 10:02:08AM -0700, Tuan Phan wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 3:27 AM Sunil V L > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 04:25:18PM -0700, Tuan Phan wrote: > > > > The timer compare register is 64-bit so simplifying the delay > > > > function. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan > > > > --- > > > > MdePkg/Include/Register/RiscV64/RiscVImpl.h | 1 - > > > > .../BaseRiscV64CpuTimerLib/CpuTimerLib.c | 62 > +++++++++---------- > > > > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/MdePkg/Include/Register/RiscV64/RiscVImpl.h > > > b/MdePkg/Include/Register/RiscV64/RiscVImpl.h > > > > index ee5c2ba60377..6997de6cc001 100644 > > > > --- a/MdePkg/Include/Register/RiscV64/RiscVImpl.h > > > > +++ b/MdePkg/Include/Register/RiscV64/RiscVImpl.h > > > > @@ -20,6 +20,5 @@ > > > > Name: > > > > > > > > #define ASM_FUNC(Name) _ASM_FUNC(ASM_PFX(Name), .text. ## Name) > > > > -#define RISCV_TIMER_COMPARE_BITS 32 > > > > > > > > #endif > > > > diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscV64CpuTimerLib/CpuTimerLib.c > > > b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscV64CpuTimerLib/CpuTimerLib.c > > > > index 9c8efc0f3530..57800177023c 100644 > > > > --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscV64CpuTimerLib/CpuTimerLib.c > > > > +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscV64CpuTimerLib/CpuTimerLib.c > > > > @@ -22,26 +22,19 @@ > > > > @param Delay A period of time to delay in ticks. > > > > > > > > **/ > > > > +STATIC > > > > VOID > > > > InternalRiscVTimerDelay ( > > > > - IN UINT32 Delay > > > > + IN UINT64 Delay > > > > ) > > > > { > > > > - UINT32 Ticks; > > > > - UINT32 Times; > > > > - > > > > - Times = Delay >> (RISCV_TIMER_COMPARE_BITS - 2); > > > > - Delay &= ((1 << (RISCV_TIMER_COMPARE_BITS - 2)) - 1); > > > > - do { > > > > - // > > > > - // The target timer count is calculated here > > > > - // > > > > - Ticks = RiscVReadTimer () + Delay; > > > > - Delay = 1 << (RISCV_TIMER_COMPARE_BITS - 2); > > > > - while (((Ticks - RiscVReadTimer ()) & (1 << > > > (RISCV_TIMER_COMPARE_BITS - 1))) == 0) { > > > > - CpuPause (); > > > > - } > > > > - } while (Times-- > 0); > > > > + UINT64 Ticks; > > > > + > > > > + Ticks = RiscVReadTimer () + Delay; > > > > + > > > > + while (RiscVReadTimer () <= Ticks) { > > > > + CpuPause (); > > > > + } > > > > } > > > > > > > > /** > > > > @@ -61,14 +54,14 @@ MicroSecondDelay ( > > > > ) > > > > { > > > > InternalRiscVTimerDelay ( > > > > - (UINT32)DivU64x32 ( > > > > - MultU64x32 ( > > > > - MicroSeconds, > > > > - PcdGet64 (PcdCpuCoreCrystalClockFrequency) > > > > - ), > > > > - 1000000u > > > > - ) > > > > - ); > > > > + DivU64x32 ( > > > > + MultU64x32 ( > > > > + MicroSeconds, > > > > + PcdGet64 (PcdCpuCoreCrystalClockFrequency) > > > > + ), > > > > + 1000000u > > > > + ) > > > > + ); > > > > return MicroSeconds; > > > > } > > > > > > > > @@ -89,14 +82,14 @@ NanoSecondDelay ( > > > > ) > > > > { > > > > InternalRiscVTimerDelay ( > > > > - (UINT32)DivU64x32 ( > > > > - MultU64x32 ( > > > > - NanoSeconds, > > > > - PcdGet64 (PcdCpuCoreCrystalClockFrequency) > > > > - ), > > > > - 1000000000u > > > > - ) > > > > - ); > > > > + DivU64x32 ( > > > > + MultU64x32 ( > > > > + NanoSeconds, > > > > + PcdGet64 (PcdCpuCoreCrystalClockFrequency) > > > > + ), > > > > + 1000000000u > > > > + ) > > > > + ); > > > > return NanoSeconds; > > > > } > > > > > > > > @@ -147,8 +140,9 @@ GetPerformanceCounter ( > > > > UINT64 > > > > EFIAPI > > > > GetPerformanceCounterProperties ( > > > > - OUT UINT64 *StartValue, OPTIONAL > > > > - OUT UINT64 *EndValue OPTIONAL > > > > + OUT UINT64 *StartValue, > > > > + OPTIONAL > > > > + OUT UINT64 *EndValue OPTIONAL > > > > > > Hi Tuan, > > > > > > What is this change? The formatting doesn't look correct. Have you run > > > CI tests? > > > > > => That is the result of running crutinize tool with edk2 config. Should > I > > leave it as before? > > > I have not used crutinize tool. But this change looks unnecessary. I > would use uncrustify tool locally for any formatting fixes since the > same tool gets used in CI tests also. > => The problem is the old version of this file has not passed the uncrustify tool. So without the "unnecessary changes", this MR will not pass the CI. > > > > > > > Otherwise LGTM. Thanks for the fix! > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Sunil V L > > > >