I think refactoring it to a PEIM is better. But I am not sure if having below Bugzilla completed can meet your needs without refactoring the lib to PEIM.
> I don't want to get too distracted with the example given, but I > completely agree that a different library instance should be used for > pre-memory and post-memory. I think the library interface is too broad > in scope and that contributes to causing this issue so I filed this BZ > to request the BoardInitLib API be refactored: > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3578 > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Michael Kubacki > Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 10:54 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms][PATCH v1 1/1] IntelSiliconPkg: Add > BaseSmmAccessLibNull > > So you would rather leave it as a library class instead of refactoring > it to a PEIM? > > Again, the problem is it is a library class. So I am asking whether you > want to treat it as a library class or you are going to refactor it to a > PEIM. > > On 9/9/2021 10:49 AM, Ni, Ray wrote: > > No, I don't. > > I still don't think having a NULL SmmAccessLib is a good idea. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Michael Kubacki <mikub...@linux.microsoft.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 10:12 PM > >> To: Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms][PATCH v1 1/1] IntelSiliconPkg: > >> Add BaseSmmAccessLibNull > >> > >> Ray, > >> > >> Do you have plans to do something here? Whether take this patch or > >> refactor SmmAccessLib to a PEIM? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Michael > >> > >> On 8/20/2021 3:34 PM, Michael Kubacki wrote: > >>> Since you asked for an example that was just one that I provided. I > >>> don't think it detracts from the fact that a NULL instance makes sense > >>> if the SmmAccessLib library class exists. The fact that a NULL instance > >>> could not be allowed to exist is also confusing. > >>> > >>> I don't want to get too distracted with the example given, but I > >>> completely agree that a different library instance should be used for > >>> pre-memory and post-memory. I think the library interface is too broad > >>> in scope and that contributes to causing this issue so I filed this BZ > >>> to request the BoardInitLib API be refactored: > >>> https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3578 > >>> > >>> From the other email thread about SmmAccessLib, I think we are on the > >>> same page that the library would be better as a PEIM. Is that something > >>> that could be done soon? Or could we have this until that is done? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Michael > >>> > >>> On 8/20/2021 1:33 AM, Ni, Ray wrote: > >>>> Null SmmAccessLib is confusing to me. Have you evaluated the option: > >>>> Create two instances of BoardInitLib for pre-mem and post-mem. Pre-mem > >>>> one doesn’t link to SmmAccessLib > >>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of > >>>>> Michael Kubacki > >>>>> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2021 12:53 AM > >>>>> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com> > >>>>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms][PATCH v1 1/1] > >>>>> IntelSiliconPkg: Add BaseSmmAccessLibNull > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't understand your argument. > >>>>> > >>>>> The library class (SmmAccessLib) that already exists is the abstraction > >>>>> layer. This is not introducing a new layer of abstraction. It is using > >>>>> the current layer of abstraction. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Michael > >>>>> > >>>>> On 8/19/2021 5:49 AM, Ni, Ray wrote: > >>>>>> Michael, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I don’t think scenario #1 is a good reason for NULL instance of > >>>>>> SmmAccessLib. The root cause is BoardInitLib lib class supports pre-mem > >>>>>> and post-mem board init. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Below solution can avoid NULL SmmAccessLib: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Create two instances of BoardInitLib for pre-mem and post-mem. Pre-mem > >>>>>> one doesn’t link to SmmAccessLib. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> For scenario #2, if a particular platform doesn’t support S3, why does > >>>>>> this platform include the PEIM? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please understand that I want to avoid introducing more abstraction > >>>>>> layers. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ray > >>>>>> > >>>>>> *From:* Michael Kubacki <mikub...@linux.microsoft.com> > >>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, August 13, 2021 10:16 AM > >>>>>> *To:* Ni; Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io > >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms][PATCH v1 1/1] > >>>>>> IntelSiliconPkg: Add BaseSmmAccessLibNull > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sure. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Scenario #1: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> MinPlatformPkg/PlatformInit/PlatformInitPei/PlatformInitPreMem.inf and > >>>>>> MinPlatormPkg/PlatformInit/PlatformInitPei/PlatformInitPostMem.inf both > >>>>>> link against an instance of BoardInitLib. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Many boards link against a single BoardInitLib instance. See example - > >>>>>> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > >>>>> > >> > platforms/blob/cd4e6b716c7d1bcde94035e7dce14b53a553e103/Platform/Intel/KabylakeOpenBoardPkg/KabylakeRvp3/OpenB > >>>>> > >>>>> oardPkg.dsc#L203 > >>>>>> <https://github.com/tianocore/edk2- > >>>>> > >> > platforms/blob/cd4e6b716c7d1bcde94035e7dce14b53a553e103/Platform/Intel/KabylakeOpenBoardPkg/KabylakeRvp3/OpenB > >>>>> > >>>>> oardPkg.dsc#L203> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That BoardInitLib instance may link against SmmAccessLib. > >>>>>> PlatformInitPreMem may wish to library class override the SmmAccessLib > >>>>>> to the NULL instance while keeping it to non-NULL instance in > >>>>>> PlatformInitPostMem. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Scenario #2: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> A PEIM is built that checks whether the boot mode is S3. If so, it > >>>>>> calls > >>>>>> PeiInstallSmmAccessPpi(). A particular platform does not support S3, > >>>>>> therefore, it links BaseSmmAccessLibNull as its library instance for > >>>>>> SmmAccessLib. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#80444): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/80444 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/84769134/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
