Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v2 4/4] OvmfPkg/PlatformPei: log pei memory cap details

["Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 2/2/24 11:47, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
> ---
>  OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/MemDetect.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/MemDetect.c b/OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/MemDetect.c
> index 48ad0b83a55e..737166f1b0ad 100644
> --- a/OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/MemDetect.c
> +++ b/OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/MemDetect.c
> @@ -263,6 +263,30 @@ GetPeiMemoryCap (
>    //
>    MemoryCap = EFI_PAGES_TO_SIZE (TotalPages) + ApStacks + SIZE_64MB;
>  
> +  DEBUG ((
> +    DEBUG_INFO,
> +    "%a: page tables: %6lu KB (%lu/%lu/%lu/%lu pages for levels 5/4/3/2)\n",
> +    __func__,
> +    RShiftU64 (EFI_PAGES_TO_SIZE (TotalPages), 10),

should be

  RShiftU64 (EFI_PAGES_TO_SIZE ((UINTN)TotalPages), 10)

> +    Level5Pages,
> +    Level4Pages,
> +    Level3Pages,
> +    Level2Pages

These values are now UINT32s, so the format specifier for each should be %u

> +    ));
> +  DEBUG ((
> +    DEBUG_INFO,
> +    "%a: ap stacks:   %6lu KB (%d cpus)\n",
> +    __func__,
> +    RShiftU64 (ApStacks, 10),
> +    PlatformInfoHob->PcdCpuMaxLogicalProcessorNumber

"PlatformInfoHob->PcdCpuMaxLogicalProcessorNumber" is a UINT32, should
be formatted with %u, not %d

> +    ));
> +  DEBUG ((
> +    DEBUG_INFO,
> +    "%a: memory cap:  %6lu KB\n",
> +    __func__,
> +    RShiftU64 (MemoryCap, 10)
> +    ));
> +
>    ASSERT (MemoryCap <= MAX_UINT32);
>    return (UINT32)MemoryCap;
>  }

OK

> @@ -347,10 +371,10 @@ PublishPeiMemory (
>      } else {
>        DEBUG ((
>          DEBUG_WARN,
> -        "%a: Not enough memory for PEI (have %llu KB, estimated need %llu KB)\n",
> +        "%a: Not enough memory for PEI (have %lu KB, estimated need %u KB)\n",
>          __func__,
>          RShiftU64 (MemorySize, 10),
> -        RShiftU64 (PeiMemoryCap, 10)
> +        PeiMemoryCap >> 10
>          ));
>      }
>    }

Did you mean to squash this hunk into patch#1 instead? (It seems
correct, just doesn't belong here IMO.)

Laszlo



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#115106): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/115106
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104117105/7686176
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-