On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:57:27PM +0530, Dhaval Sharma wrote: > "The CpuDxe interface will be the wrapper." Yes, of course. It needs to be > added. I was just saying that maybe any CMO checking is not required there > as cmo library will take care of it. > That's correct.
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:24 PM Sunil V L <suni...@ventanamicro.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 11:42:57AM +0530, Dhaval Sharma wrote: > > > Sunil, > > > I thought "WriteBackDataCacheRange not supported" is more explicit over > > > "CMO not available". > > > > > Okay. > > > > > @Pedro Falcato <pedro.falc...@gmail.com> For the example you mentioned, > > is > > > your concern more about someone not being able to notice the problem > > (that > > > the system is non-coherent) at the time of development and later ending > > up > > > with corrupted data during production? And you are suggesting that an > > > Assert helps address that problem by making that problem more visible to > > > the developer and a verbose warning does not? > > > > > > I can create a patch for CpuFlushCpuDataCache but I think we should avoid > > > CMO based return in there. Because in case of InvalidateDataCacheRange we > > > have an alternate implementation of fence in the absence of CMO. So it is > > > better to let riscvcache decide the right implementation. > > > > > The CpuDxe interface will be the wrapper. See Arm's implementation. > > Since CMO support is added now, the CpuDxe interface should be updated. > > > > Thanks, > > Sunil > > > > > -- > Thanks! > =D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#114303): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/114303 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/103805230/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
