[edk2-devel] Is there any use case of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?

[Dandan Bi]

Hi Ray,

I think for now it will not cause any issue when standalone mm is launched.
As the functionality of collecting StandaloneMm performance data itself is missing in Edk2. 
So, it's ok to remove the related logic in FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now.

But later if we want to collect the StandaloneMm performance data, we should add the support in Edk2 like what SmmPerformanceLib/SmmCorePerformanceLib have done for SMM.


Thanks,
Dandan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ni, Ray <ray.ni at intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 9:42 AM
> To: devel at edk2.groups.io; kuqin12 at gmail.com; Bi, Dandan
> <dandan.bi at intel.com>; kun.q at outlook.com
> Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu at intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang at intel.com>;
> gaoliming <gaoliming at byosoft.com.cn>; Yao, Jiewen
> <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew at microsoft.com>;
> 'Sean Brogan' <sean.brogan at microsoft.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> 
> It looks like a good topic to discuss in TianoCore Open Design meeting😊
> 
> Question to Dandan's proposal: Does it cause any conflict (or help) when
> standalone mm is launched from PEI?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ray
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: devel at edk2.groups.io <devel at edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Kun
> Qin
> > Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 6:49 AM
> > To: devel at edk2.groups.io; Bi, Dandan <dandan.bi at intel.com>;
> > kun.q at outlook.com
> > Cc: Wu, Hao A <hao.a.wu at intel.com>; Wang, Jian J
> > <jian.j.wang at intel.com>; gaoliming <gaoliming at byosoft.com.cn>; Yao,
> > Jiewen <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Bret Barkelew
> > <Bret.Barkelew at microsoft.com>; 'Sean Brogan'
> > <sean.brogan at microsoft.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
> FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> >
> > Hi Dandan,
> >
> > Thanks for letting me know. I added Bret and Sean to the thread for
> > broader view in our scope.
> >
> > But currently our StandaloneMm Core does not report performance data
> > to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm module.
> >
> > Is the idea to centralize the performance report collection job to
> > SmmCorePerformanceLib and remove the FirmwarePerformance**Mm
> driver?
> > Is there any plan to support a Standalone instance once the
> > traditional MM version is functional?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Kun
> >
> >
> > On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
> > > Hi Kun,
> > >
> > > I plan to make some change for FirmwarePerformanceSmm.inf, may also
> > > update the behavior of FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf as they
> > > are sharing codes now.
> > >
> > > And I saw you are the submitter of this driver. Could you help
> > > clarify following questions ? Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > >  1. Do you have the use case to leverage
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf to collect Standalone MM
> > >     performance data now?
> > >  2. Do you have any Library/module used by StandaloneMmCore to
> collect
> > >     Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the
> SmmCorePerformanceLib used
> > >     for SMM core?
> > >  3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm
> to
> > >     SmmCorePerformanceLib as below. Do you think is it ok just to remove
> > >     them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
> > >
> > > If there is not any module to report Standalone MM performance data
> > > to FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, I think it should be OK to
> > > remove them from FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm now.
> > >
> > > Change:
> > >
> > > SMM performance data collection now:
> > >
> > >  1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
> > >     report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
> > >     code. **
> > >  2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
> > >     FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance
> data and
> > >     allocate performance table to store all the performance data.
> > >
> > > Now I want to simplify the process to make DxeCorePerformanceLib
> > > communicate with SmmCorePerformanceLib directly to collect SMM
> > > performance data, so FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm don’t need
> to
> > > get the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and
> register
> > > SMI handler for the communication with DxeCorePerformanceLib.
> > >
> > > For FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf, just remove this logic if
> > > there is no module to prepare MM performance data to it now.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Dandan
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > 
> >



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#78781): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/78781
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/84682596/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-