Hi Swatisri,
Thanks for the patch. Please find my comments inline marked [Rohit] -
> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Name
> via groups.io
> Sent: 16 August 2022 21:18
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Sami Mujawar <sami.muja...@arm.com>;
> Alexei Fedorov <alexei.fedo...@arm.com>; michael.d.kin...@intel.com;
> gaolim...@byosoft.com.cn; zhiguang....@intel.com
> Cc: Swatisri Kantamsetti <swatis...@nvidia.com>
> Subject: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Mde Pkg: Support for MPAM ACPI Table
>
> From: Swatisri Kantamsetti <swatis...@nvidia.com>
>
> Added MPAM table header, MSC and Resource Node info structures
>
> Signed-off-by: Swatisri Kantamsetti <swatis...@nvidia.com>
> ---
> MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Acpi64.h | 5 ++
> MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Mpam.h | 69
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 74 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Mpam.h
>
> diff --git a/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Acpi64.h
> b/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Acpi64.h
> index fe5ebfac2b..e54f631186 100644
> --- a/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Acpi64.h
> +++ b/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Acpi64.h
> @@ -2952,6 +2952,11 @@ typedef struct {
> ///
> #define
> EFI_ACPI_6_4_PROCESSOR_PROPERTIES_TOPOLOGY_TABLE_STRUCTURE_SI
> GNATURE SIGNATURE_32('P', 'P', 'T', 'T')
>
> +///
> +/// "MPAM" Memory System Resource Partitioning And Monitoring Table
> ///
> +#define
> +EFI_ACPI_6_4_MEMORY_SYSTEM_RESOURCE_PARTITIONING_MONITORI
> NG_TABLE_STRUC
> +TURE_SIGNATURE SIGNATURE_32('M', 'P', 'A', 'M')
> +
> ///
> /// "PSDT" Persistent System Description Table /// diff --git
> a/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Mpam.h
> b/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Mpam.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..e0f75f0114
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/MdePkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Mpam.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
> +/** @file
> + ACPI Memory System Resource Partitioning And Monitoring (MPAM)
> + as specified in ARM spec DEN0065
> +
> + Copyright (c) 2022, NVIDIA CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
> + Copyright (c) 2022, ARM Limited. All rights reserved.
> + SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause-Patent **/
> +
> +#ifndef _MPAM_H_
> +#define _MPAM_H_
> +
> +#pragma pack(1)
> +
> +///
> +/// Memory System Resource Partitioning and Monitoring Table (MPAM)
> ///
> +typedef struct {
> + EFI_ACPI_DESCRIPTION_HEADER Header;
> + UINT32 NumNodes;
> + UINT32 NodeOffset;
> + UINT32 Reserved;
> +}
> +EFI_ACPI_6_4_MEMORY_SYSTEM_RESOURCE_PARTITIONING_MONITORI
> NG_TABLE_HEADE
> +R;
[Rohit] Shouldn't the header be followed by MSC node body type as defined in
MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2, table 3 - The MPAM table and section 2.1, table 4 -
MSC Node body?
> +
> +///
> +/// MPAM Revision (as defined in ACPI 6.4 spec.) /// #define
> +EFI_ACPI_6_4_MEMORY_SYSTEM_RESOURCE_PARTITIONING_MONITORI
> NG_TABLE_REVIS
> +ION 0x01
> +
> +///
> +/// Memory System Controller Node Structure ///
> +
> +typedef struct {
> + UINT16 Length;
> + UINT16 Reserved;
> + UINT32 Identifier;
> + UINT64 BaseAddress;
> + UINT32 MmioSize;
> + UINT32 OverflowInterrupt;
> + UINT32 OverflowInterruptFlags;
[Rohit] Would it be better to have a type (possibly bitfield struct) instead of
a plain UINT32 for Flags? (MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2.1.1, table 5 - Interrupt
flags)
> + UINT32 Reserved1;
> + UINT32 OverflowInterruptAff;
> + UINT32 ErrorInterrupt;
> + UINT32 ErrorInterruptFlags;
[Rohit ] Same comment as before above.
> + UINT32 Reserved2;
> + UINT32 ErrorInterruptAff;
> + UINT32 MaxNRdyUsec;
> + UINT64 LinkedDeviceHwId;
> + UINT32 LinkedDeviceInstanceHwId;
> + UINT32 NumResourceNodes;
> +} EFI_ACPI_6_4_MPAM_MSC_NODE;
> +
> +///
> +/// Resource Node Structure
> +///
> +
> +typedef struct {
> + UINT32 Identifier;
> + UINT8 RisIndex;
> + UINT16 Reserved1;
> + UINT8 LocatorType;
> + UINT64 Locator;
[Rohit ] Shouldn't " Locator " field be 12 bytes in size, possibly a separate
type? (MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2.2, table 7 - Resource node and section 2.3.2
table 10 - locator descriptor)
> + UINT32 NumFuncDep;
> +} EFI_ACPI_6_4_MPAM_RESOURCE_NODE;
[Rohit] Since "NumFuncDep" field is part of EFI_ACPI_6_4_MPAM_RESOURCE_NODE
type and this could be non-zero, should we also need the type for functional
dependency descriptors? (MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2.2.1, table 8 - Functional
dependency descriptor)
[Rohit] Also, could some of the commonly used macros be added to this header,
please? (location types, MPAM interrupt mode, interrupt types, affinity type,
etc)
> +
> +#pragma pack()
> +
> +#endif
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
>
>
>
Regards,
Rohit
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#92575): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/92575
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/93069490/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
