>
> + WaitForSemaphore (&Token->RunningApCount);
> +
> + if (Token->RunningApCount == 0) {
> + ReleaseSpinLock (Token->SpinLock);
> }
1. if (InterlockedDecrement (&Token->RunningApCount) == 0) {
ReleaseSpinLock (Token->SpinLock);
}
We should avoid checking RunningApCount directly because it's possible
that AP#1 decrease the Count to 1 and before AP#1 checks the value against 0
the Count is decreased by AP#2 to 0. So that causes AP#1 and AP#2 call
ReleaseSpinLock() on the same SpinLock.
>
> + // Decrease the count to mark this AP as finished.
2. BSP is also handled here. So this comment is mis-leading.
>
> + //
>
> + if (Token != NULL) {
> + WaitForSemaphore (&ProcToken->RunningApCount);
3. The code is written correctly but improperly IMO.
Token is checked but ProcToken is deferenced.
I suggest you check ProcToken directly.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#52497): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/52497
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/69226060/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
