> > 2. We could break the while-loop when NumberOfProcessors equals to the > value we retrieved from MpInfo2Hob. Right? > This can speed up the code when there are lots of HOBs after the last > SmmBaseHob instance. > > Dun: If the code flow break before finding all potential SmmBaseHob instance, > there may be more SmmBaseHob instance covering NumberOfProcessors > more than the expected value. The code is to catch this case. Do you think we > should also catch this?
When there are more instances than expected, we treat it as a failure. When number of instances is expected, we treat gap or overlap as a failure. We do not need to distinguish between the two kinds of failures. So, we could assume the number of instances is expected, then check if all the found instances can cover all processors. If not, we treat it as a failure. > > > + } > > + > > + ASSERT (NumberOfProcessors == MaxNumberOfCpus); > > 3. ASSERT may fail when HotPlug is TRUE? > > Dun: If HotPlug, I think the SmBase count should be > PcdCpuMaxLogicalProcessorNumber instead of the NumberOfProcessors > extracted from MpInfo2Hob? You are right! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#112149): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/112149 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102987142/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
