Ning, I tried to run uncrustify locally and still saw additional changes. It might mean the code style doesn't follow the uncrustify. more comments embedded in the patch mail starting with [Ray.].
Thanks, Ray ________________________________ From: Feng, Ning <ning.f...@intel.com> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2024 19:13 To: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> Cc: Feng, Ning <ning.f...@intel.com>; Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com>; Wu, Jiaxin <jiaxin...@intel.com> Subject: [PATCH] Pkg-Module:UefiCpuPkg/MpLib [Ray.1] The subject should be more specific. E.g.: UefiCpuPkg/MpInitLib: Do not assume BSP is #0 REF:https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4778 MPlib have wrong expectation that bsp id should always be 0 in [Ray.1] MPlib should be MpInitLib. "bsp id" -> "BSP index". MpInitLibInitialize(), SwitchBsp(),ApWakeupFunction(). That will caused the data mismatch, if the beginning bsp is not 0. [Ray.2] "will caused" -> "will cause", "beginning bsp" -> "initial bsp". Use CpuMpData->NewBspNumber insted of index 0 to avoid the issue. [Ray.3] "NewBspNumber" is only used in SwitchBsp() but not other places. I would just delete this from commit message. + // Restore VolatileReg saved in CpuMpData->CpuData [Ray.4] "Restore VolatileRegisters saved in CpuMpData->CpuData". // - InitializeApData (CpuMpData, 0, 0, CpuMpData->Buffer + ApStackSize); + InitializeApData (CpuMpData, CpuMpData->BspNumber, 0, CpuMpData->Buffer + ApStackSize * (CpuMpData->BspNumber+1)); [Ray.5] "BspNumber+1" -> "BspNumber + 1". (spaces before and after "+") -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#119133): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/119133 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/106256300/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
