Re: [edk2] [PATCH v2 1/2] ArmPkg/ArmGicLibArchLib: common check for GICv3
On Jul 31, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org wrote:
On 31 July 2015 at 17:16, Andrew Fish af...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org wrote:
Make Arm and Aarch64 both use the same code, conditionally compiled, to
check if the platform has GICv3.
Both source files for Arm and Aarch64 are now identical and the next
step is to move to a common source file.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel ard.biesheu...@linaro.org
---
.../Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25
--
ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25
--
2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
index 9853c7b..36dbe41 100644
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
@@ -15,7 +15,23 @@
#include Library/ArmLib.h
#include Library/ArmGicLib.h
-STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision;
+STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision =
ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
+
+STATIC
+RETURN_STATUS
+EFIAPI
+GicSystemRegistersSupported (
+ VOID
+ )
+{
+#if defined (MDE_CPU_ARM)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr1 () ARM_PFR1_GIC);
+#elif defined(MDE_CPU_AARCH64)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC);
+#else
+ #error Unknown chipset.
+#endif
+}
We usually don’t use processor specific #ifdef’s in code like this in the
edk2.
That's probably why the code is filled with vast swathes of
copy/paste/hack-one-line happening all over Arm*Pkg.
The previous code was a bad porting job. it should have been:
[Sources]
CommonCode.c
[Sources.ARM]
Arm/ArmSpecific.c
[Sources.AARCH64]
AArch64/AArch64Specific.c
Although, I could split the only GicSystemRegistersSupported function into
it's own arch specific files to fit within that regime.
This is a good form as porting to a new processor architecture is quite easy.
The process specific code is in a single file.
The #ifdefs, and possible including processor specific includes can get really
unwieldy in the general edk2 case that supports 6 CPU architectures. This form
also makes porting to new processor architectures a lot easier.
Seems over the top to me. So unless it's a hard requirement, I'd resist it.
Well the original issue was assumptions about what would happen in the code
moving forward. What happens if some SOC comes along and uses a GIC for another
CPU arch, or UEFI adds another CPU architecture?
I’m kind of 50/50 on this specific case. I would definitely reject if it was
generic code. But for me if its 50/50 I vote against the code with #ifdefs.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
We usually isolate the code to a file that is processor specific, and use
the INF file to point at the correct one.
Here is an example:
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Library/BasePeCoffLib/BasePeCoffLib.inf
[Sources]
BasePeCoffLibInternals.h
BasePeCoff.c
[Sources.IA32, Sources.X64, Sources.EBC]
PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.IPF]
Ipf/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.ARM]
Arm/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.AARCH64]
AArch64/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
This is a good example of where the arch specific sources are not
copy/paste/hack, but split out for good reason.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
RETURN_STATUS
EFIAPI
@@ -31,7 +47,7 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
// feature is implemented on the CPU. This is also convenient as our
GICv3
// driver requires SRE. If only Memory mapped access is available we try
to
// drive the GIC as a v2.
- if (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC) {
+ if (GicSystemRegistersSupported()) {
// Make sure System Register access is enabled (SRE). This depends on
the
// higher privilege level giving us permission, otherwise we will
either
// cause an exception here, or the write doesn't stick in which case
we need
@@ -46,13 +62,8 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
}
if (IccSre ICC_SRE_EL2_SRE) {
mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_3;
- goto Done;
}
}
-
- mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
-
-Done:
return RETURN_SUCCESS;
}
diff --git a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
index f8822a2..75ba156 100644
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
@@ -15,7 +15,23 @@
#include Library/ArmLib.h
#include Library/ArmGicLib.h
-STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision;
+STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision =
ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
+
+STATIC
+RETURN_STATUS
+EFIAPI
+GicSystemRegistersSupported (
+ VOID
+ )
+{
+#if defined
Re: [edk2] [PATCH v2 1/2] ArmPkg/ArmGicLibArchLib: common check for GICv3
On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org wrote:
Make Arm and Aarch64 both use the same code, conditionally compiled, to
check if the platform has GICv3.
Both source files for Arm and Aarch64 are now identical and the next
step is to move to a common source file.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel ard.biesheu...@linaro.org
---
.../Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25 --
ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25 --
2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
index 9853c7b..36dbe41 100644
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
@@ -15,7 +15,23 @@
#include Library/ArmLib.h
#include Library/ArmGicLib.h
-STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision;
+STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision =
ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
+
+STATIC
+RETURN_STATUS
+EFIAPI
+GicSystemRegistersSupported (
+ VOID
+ )
+{
+#if defined (MDE_CPU_ARM)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr1 () ARM_PFR1_GIC);
+#elif defined(MDE_CPU_AARCH64)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC);
+#else
+ #error Unknown chipset.
+#endif
+}
We usually don’t use processor specific #ifdef’s in code like this in the edk2.
We usually isolate the code to a file that is processor specific, and use the
INF file to point at the correct one.
Here is an example:
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Library/BasePeCoffLib/BasePeCoffLib.inf
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Library/BasePeCoffLib/BasePeCoffLib.inf
[Sources]
BasePeCoffLibInternals.h
BasePeCoff.c
[Sources.IA32, Sources.X64, Sources.EBC]
PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.IPF]
Ipf/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.ARM]
Arm/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.AARCH64]
AArch64/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
RETURN_STATUS
EFIAPI
@@ -31,7 +47,7 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
// feature is implemented on the CPU. This is also convenient as our GICv3
// driver requires SRE. If only Memory mapped access is available we try to
// drive the GIC as a v2.
- if (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC) {
+ if (GicSystemRegistersSupported()) {
// Make sure System Register access is enabled (SRE). This depends on the
// higher privilege level giving us permission, otherwise we will either
// cause an exception here, or the write doesn't stick in which case we
need
@@ -46,13 +62,8 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
}
if (IccSre ICC_SRE_EL2_SRE) {
mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_3;
- goto Done;
}
}
-
- mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
-
-Done:
return RETURN_SUCCESS;
}
diff --git a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
index f8822a2..75ba156 100644
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c
@@ -15,7 +15,23 @@
#include Library/ArmLib.h
#include Library/ArmGicLib.h
-STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision;
+STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision =
ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
+
+STATIC
+RETURN_STATUS
+EFIAPI
+GicSystemRegistersSupported (
+ VOID
+ )
+{
+#if defined (MDE_CPU_ARM)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr1 () ARM_PFR1_GIC);
+#elif defined(MDE_CPU_AARCH64)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC);
+#else
+ #error Unknown chipset.
+#endif
+}
RETURN_STATUS
EFIAPI
@@ -31,7 +47,7 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
// feature is implemented on the CPU. This is also convenient as our GICv3
// driver requires SRE. If only Memory mapped access is available we try to
// drive the GIC as a v2.
- if (ArmReadIdPfr1 () ARM_PFR1_GIC) {
+ if (GicSystemRegistersSupported()) {
// Make sure System Register access is enabled (SRE). This depends on the
// higher privilege level giving us permission, otherwise we will either
// cause an exception here, or the write doesn't stick in which case we
need
@@ -46,13 +62,8 @@ ArmGicArchLibInitialize (
}
if (IccSre ICC_SRE_EL2_SRE) {
mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_3;
- goto Done;
}
}
-
- mGicArchRevision = ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
-
-Done:
return RETURN_SUCCESS;
}
--
2.1.0
___
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
___
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
Re: [edk2] [PATCH v2 1/2] ArmPkg/ArmGicLibArchLib: common check for GICv3
On 31 Jul 2015 21:21, Cohen, Eugene eug...@hp.com wrote:
The .inf/source file approach is the way to be consistent with the rest
of edk2. I think it would be messy for the rest of edk2 to use .inf
binding and for Arm packages to use a combination of #ifdef and .inf
techniques. As someone who has ported UEFI to a new processor
architecture I appreciate the .inf approach. When you try to build the
component for a new architecture and you're missing the source file you I
get nice linker errors, a virtual 'todo' list for the port
I'm not in favour of over engineering code for the sake of it. A #error
exactly at the line of code you need to examine is precise. Linker errors
are never nice.
If someone wishes to expand this code beyond Arm, they will need to do more
than create a simple source file to provide a helper function. The entire
package will need reworking.
There's a right way to do this - refactor to minimize the difference to
the smallest possible chunk of code and avoid the temptation to copy and
paste the existing function / source file.
That's exactly what my patch achieves.
Eugene
-Original Message-
From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-boun...@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of
Andrew Fish
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2015 10:54 AM
To: Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org
Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org; Linaro UEFI Mailman List
linaro-u...@lists.linaro.org; Leif Lindholm leif.lindh...@linaro.org;
Ard Biesheuvel ard.biesheu...@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH v2 1/2] ArmPkg/ArmGicLibArchLib: common check
for GICv3
On Jul 31, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org wrote:
On 31 July 2015 at 17:16, Andrew Fish af...@apple.com wrote:
On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:49 AM, Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org
wrote:
Make Arm and Aarch64 both use the same code, conditionally compiled, to
check if the platform has GICv3.
Both source files for Arm and Aarch64 are now identical and the next
step is to move to a common source file.
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0
Signed-off-by: Ryan Harkin ryan.har...@linaro.org
Reviewed-by: Ard Biesheuvel ard.biesheu...@linaro.org
---
.../Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25
--
ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/Arm/ArmGicArchLib.c | 25
--
2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
index 9853c7b..36dbe41 100644
--- a/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
+++ b/ArmPkg/Library/ArmGicArchLib/AArch64/ArmGicArchLib.c
@@ -15,7 +15,23 @@
#include Library/ArmLib.h
#include Library/ArmGicLib.h
-STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision;
+STATIC ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISIONmGicArchRevision =
ARM_GIC_ARCH_REVISION_2;
+
+STATIC
+RETURN_STATUS
+EFIAPI
+GicSystemRegistersSupported (
+ VOID
+ )
+{
+#if defined (MDE_CPU_ARM)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr1 () ARM_PFR1_GIC);
+#elif defined(MDE_CPU_AARCH64)
+ return (ArmReadIdPfr0 () AARCH64_PFR0_GIC);
+#else
+ #error Unknown chipset.
+#endif
+}
We usually don’t use processor specific #ifdef’s in code like this in
the
edk2.
That's probably why the code is filled with vast swathes of
copy/paste/hack-one-line happening all over Arm*Pkg.
The previous code was a bad porting job. it should have been:
[Sources]
CommonCode.c
[Sources.ARM]
Arm/ArmSpecific.c
[Sources.AARCH64]
AArch64/AArch64Specific.c
Although, I could split the only GicSystemRegistersSupported function
into
it's own arch specific files to fit within that regime.
This is a good form as porting to a new processor architecture is quite
easy. The process specific code is in a single file.
The #ifdefs, and possible including processor specific includes can get
really unwieldy in the general edk2 case that supports 6 CPU architectures.
This form also makes porting to new processor architectures a lot easier.
Seems over the top to me. So unless it's a hard requirement, I'd
resist it.
Well the original issue was assumptions about what would happen in the
code moving forward. What happens if some SOC comes along and uses a GIC
for another CPU arch, or UEFI adds another CPU architecture?
I’m kind of 50/50 on this specific case. I would definitely reject if it
was generic code. But for me if its 50/50 I vote against the code with
#ifdefs.
Thanks,
Andrew Fish
We usually isolate the code to a file that is processor specific, and
use
the INF file to point at the correct one.
Here is an example:
https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdePkg/Library/BasePeCoffLib/BasePeCoffLib.inf
[Sources]
BasePeCoffLibInternals.h
BasePeCoff.c
[Sources.IA32, Sources.X64, Sources.EBC]
PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.IPF]
Ipf/PeCoffLoaderEx.c
[Sources.ARM]
Arm
