Paolo,

It makes sense to match real HW.  That puts us back to
the reset vector and handling the initial SMI at
3000:8000.  That is all workable from a FW implementation
perspective.  It look like the only issue left is DMA.

DMA protection of memory ranges is a chipset feature.
For the current QEMU implementation, what ranges of
memory are guaranteed to be protected from DMA?  Is
it only A/B seg and TSEG?

Thanks,

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paolo Bonzini [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 10:40 AM
> To: Kinney, Michael D <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Alex Williamson <[email protected]>; Laszlo
> Ersek <[email protected]>; [email protected]; qemu
> devel list <[email protected]>; Igor Mammedov
> <[email protected]>; Chen, Yingwen
> <[email protected]>; Nakajima, Jun
> <[email protected]>; Boris Ostrovsky
> <[email protected]>; Joao Marcal Lemos Martins
> <[email protected]>; Phillip Goerl
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] CPU hotplug using
> SMM with QEMU+OVMF
> 
> On 21/08/19 19:25, Kinney, Michael D wrote:
> > Could we have an initial SMBASE that is within TSEG.
> >
> > If we bring in hot plug CPUs one at a time, then
> initial SMBASE in
> > TSEG can reprogram the SMBASE to the correct value for
> that CPU.
> >
> > Can we add a register to the hot plug controller that
> allows the BSP
> > to set the initial SMBASE value for a hot added CPU?
> The default can
> > be 3000:8000 for compatibility.
> >
> > Another idea is when the SMI handler runs for a hot
> add CPU event, the
> > SMM monarch programs the hot plug controller register
> with the SMBASE
> > to use for the CPU that is being added.  As each CPU
> is added, a
> > different SMBASE value can be programmed by the SMM
> Monarch.
> 
> Yes, all of these would work.  Again, I'm interested in
> having something that has a hope of being implemented in
> real hardware.
> 
> Another, far easier to implement possibility could be a
> lockable MSR (could be the existing
> MSR_SMM_FEATURE_CONTROL) that allows programming the
> SMBASE outside SMM.  It would be nice if such a bit
> could be defined by Intel.
> 
> Paolo

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#46174): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/46174
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/32979681/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub  [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to