> -----Original Message----- > From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindh...@linaro.org] > Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2019 2:13 AM > To: Wu, Hao A > Cc: Zeng, Star; Laszlo Ersek; edk2-devel@lists.01.org; > ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; Wang, Jian J; Ni, Ray; Andrew Fish; Kinney, Michael > D > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] MdeModulePkg: add LockBoxNullLib for !IA32/X64 > in .dsc > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 03:27:45AM +0000, Wu, Hao A wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Zeng, Star > > > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 9:03 AM > > > To: Leif Lindholm; Laszlo Ersek > > > Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; Wang, Jian J; Wu, > > > Hao A; Ni, Ray; Andrew Fish; Kinney, Michael D; Zeng, Star > > > Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] MdeModulePkg: add LockBoxNullLib for !IA32/X64 > > > in .dsc > > > > > > Another way to update the file is > > > > > > [LibraryClasses.EBC] > > > LockBoxLib|MdeModulePkg/Library/LockBoxNullLib/LockBoxNullLib.inf > > > > > > -> > > > > > > [LibraryClasses.EBC, LibraryClasses.ARM, LibraryClasses.AARCH64] > > > LockBoxLib|MdeModulePkg/Library/LockBoxNullLib/LockBoxNullLib.inf > > > > Hello Leif, > > > > The current proposed patch seems great to me. > > Reviewed-by: Hao Wu <hao.a...@intel.com> > > > > I am also fine with the above suggestion by Star. So if you prefer the > > above approach, please feel free to propose another patch. Thanks in > > advance. > > Laszlo convinced me that this change makes sense. But the argument for > that was that each architecture needs to decide itself how to > implement LockBoxLib (or not). > > What does not make sense to me is that > MdeModulePkg/Library/SmmLockBoxLib/ is used as a global default, and > set as the resolution for LockBoxLib in common sections, when it is > only valid for 2 of the 6 architectures supported by the UEFI > specification.
Hello Leif, I filed a BZ tracker according to your above concern: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1660 We will find an approach to address it. > > My original version is my preferred way of addressing the immediate > problem though, mainly to keep the separate .EBC section. Got it. Do you want me to help to push the patch? Best Regards, Hao Wu > > Best Regards, > > Leif > > > Best Regards, > > Hao Wu > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Star > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Leif Lindholm [mailto:leif.lindh...@linaro.org] > > > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 1:43 AM > > > To: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > > > Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; ard.biesheu...@linaro.org; Wang, Jian J > > > <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Wu, Hao A <hao.a...@intel.com>; Ni, Ray > > > <ray...@intel.com>; Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; Andrew Fish > > > <af...@apple.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] MdeModulePkg: add LockBoxNullLib for !IA32/X64 > > > in .dsc > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 03:51:39PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > > > > Hi Leif, > > > > > > > > On 03/18/19 15:56, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > > > > Commit 05fd2a926833 > > > > > ("MdeModulePkg/NvmExpressPei: Consume S3StorageDeviceInitList > > > > > LockBox") added a dependency on LockBoxLib to NvmExpressPei, > causing > > > > > builds using MdeModulePkg.dsc to fail on architectures other than > > > > > IA32/X64 with missing reference to > > > > > gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdDxeIplSwitchToLongMode. > > > > > > > > > > Add a resolution for LockBoxNullLib for ARM/AARCH64 to restore builds. > > > > > > > > > > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindh...@linaro.org> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Note: this patch hides the symptom, but this isn't really the fix I > > > > > would like to see. > > > > > > > > > > The build error is caused by the chain of: > > > > > 1) NvmExpressPei depending on LockBoxLib > > > > > 2) LockBoxLib being mapped to SmmLockBoxPeiLib in > > > > > [LibraryClasses.common.PEIM] > > > > > 3) SmmLockBoxPeiLib depending on PcdDxeIplSwitchToLongMode > > > > > 4) PcdDxeIplSwitchToLongMode being declared in > > > > > [PcdsFeatureFlag.IA32, PcdsFeatureFlag.X64] in MdeModulePkg.dsc > > > > > > > > > > Now, an alternative quick-fix would be to move the PEIM LockBoxLib > > > > > mapping into a [LibraryClasses.IA32.PEIM, LibraryClasses.X64.PEIM] > > > > > section. But that would leave NvmExpressPei unbuildable on anything > > > > > not IA32/X64. > > > > > > > > > > Another option would be to add default declaration (for all other > > > > > architectures) of FALSE for PcdDxeIplSwitchToLongMode in > > > > > MdeModulePkg.dec, but the current way this is expressed seems to > > > > > treat this as an architecture-specific feature (which it is). > > > > > > > > > > What I believe would be the cleanest solution would be to abstract > > > > > NvmExpressPei to the point where it can function without the > LockBoxLib. > > > > > But regardless, it does not look valid to me for something as > > > > > architecture-specific as MdeModulePkg/Library/SmmLockBoxLib/ to live > > > > > under .common sections in the .dsc. (And if this changes at some > > > > > point, because we implement an ARM/AARCH64 equivalent based on > > > > > StandaloneMmPkg, we will need a major refactoring of that library > > > > > anyway.) > > > > > > > > > > / > > > > > Leif > > > > > > > > > > MdeModulePkg/MdeModulePkg.dsc | 1 + > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/MdeModulePkg.dsc > > > > > b/MdeModulePkg/MdeModulePkg.dsc index 6cd1727a0d..6e27e9cb68 > > > 100644 > > > > > --- a/MdeModulePkg/MdeModulePkg.dsc > > > > > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/MdeModulePkg.dsc > > > > > @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@ [LibraryClasses.common.MM_STANDALONE] > > > > > [LibraryClasses.ARM, LibraryClasses.AARCH64] > > > > > ArmLib|ArmPkg/Library/ArmLib/ArmBaseLib.inf > > > > > ArmMmuLib|ArmPkg/Library/ArmMmuLib/ArmMmuBaseLib.inf > > > > > + > LockBoxLib|MdeModulePkg/Library/LockBoxNullLib/LockBoxNullLib.inf > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > # It is not possible to prevent ARM compiler calls to generic > > > > > intrinsic > > > functions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think this patch is exactly the right solution. > > > > > > > > The code added in commit 05fd2a926833 is gated by (BootMode == > > > > BOOT_ON_S3_RESUME). That condition can never evaluate to TRUE on > > > > ARM/AARCH64, presently. Accordingly, the stated goal of the commit > > > > doesn't apply to ARM/AARCH64: > > > > > > > > The purpose is to perform an on-demand (partial) NVM Express device > > > > enumeration/initialization to benefit the S3 resume performance. > > > > > > > > Given that the RestoreLockBox() calls are never reached (which is > > > > correct, by design, at the present level of ACPI S3 enablement in edk2 > > > > for ARM/AARCH64), causing the lockbox APIs to "do nothing beyond > > > > compile" is exactly right. IMO anyway. > > > > > > > > Once ARM/AARCH64 grow S3 support, a functional and secure LockBox > will > > > > have to be part of that. Perhaps it will use "standalone MM"; I'm not > > > > sure. The point is, once the goal of the commit starts applying to > > > > ARM/AARCH64, a functional LockBox will have been implemented for > > > > ARM/AARCH64; and that lib instance will certainly not depend on > > > > PcdDxeIplSwitchToLongMode. > > > > > > > > Until such time, this patch is fine. > > > > > > OK, I buy that argument. > > > > > > *But* I still think the IA32/X64 specific library mappings should be moved > out > > > of .common LibraryClass sections. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Leif > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Laszlo _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
