On 13 November 2017 at 09:08, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> wrote: > On 2017-11-12 02:58:37, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 11 November 2017 at 22:04, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> >> wrote: >> > On 2017-11-11 12:38:21, Jordan Justen wrote: >> >> On 2017-11-10 07:49:04, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> >> > The first three patches enable the PEI_CORE to report OVMF's temp >> >> > SEC/PEI stack and heap usage. >> >> > >> >> > - This depends on the new fixed PCD "PcdInitValueInTempStack", >> >> > recently added for >> >> > <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=740> >> >> > ("INIT_CAR_VALUE should be defined in a central location"). >> >> > >> >> > - Ard recently implemented the same in ArmPlatformPkg, for >> >> > <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=748> ("measure temp >> >> > SEC/PEI stack usage"). >> >> > >> >> > The last (fourth) patch adapts OVMF to the larger MtrrLib stack demand >> >> > that originates from commit 2bbd7e2fbd4b ("UefiCpuPkg/MtrrLib: Update >> >> > algorithm to calculate optimal settings", 2017-09-27). OVMF's temp RAM >> >> > size is restored to the historical / original 64KB. >> >> > >> >> > This work is tracked in >> >> > <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=747> ("measure temp >> >> > SEC/PEI stack usage; grow temp SEC/PEI RAM"), with links to related >> >> > mailing list discussions. >> >> > >> >> > Repo: https://github.com/lersek/edk2.git >> >> > Branch: temp_ram_tweaks >> >> > >> >> > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> >> >> > Cc: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> >> >> > Cc: Ruiyu Ni <ruiyu...@intel.com> >> >> > >> >> > Thanks >> >> > Laszlo >> >> > >> >> > Laszlo Ersek (4): >> >> > OvmfPkg/Sec/Ia32: free up EAX for other uses while setting up the >> >> > stack >> >> > OvmfPkg/Sec/Ia32: seed the temporary RAM with PcdInitValueInTempStack >> >> > OvmfPkg/Sec/X64: seed the temporary RAM with PcdInitValueInTempStack >> >> >> >> I'd like to try a different option for these 3. Can you hold off a bit >> >> before pushing this series? >> > >> > I think we should use a C based approach instead, like in the attached >> > patch. >> > >> >> I'm not sure: having to abuse SetJump () > > True, that was annoying. It seems like we could have AsmReadEsp and > AsmReadRsp in BaseLib since we have AsmReadSp for IPF. > >> and having to leave an >> arbitrary 512 byte window both seem pretty good reasons to stick with >> assembly. > > Also true. I chose 512 because it seemed like more than SetMem32 could > reasonably need, but also much below the minimum I would expect PEI to > use. (It seemed that around 4k ended up being used.) > >> Is your concern that the stack gets cleared in RELEASE builds as well? > > No. I just prefer if we can use C rather than assembly whenever it is > reasonable. >
No discussion there. But in my opinion, anything involving the absolute value of the stack pointer does not belong in C. _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
