toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
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.
From: Ni, Ray <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 9:42 AM
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; Bi, Dandan
Cc: Wu, Hao A <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Wang, Jian J <email@example.com>;
gaoliming <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Yao, Jiewen
<email@example.com>; Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>;
'Sean Brogan' <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
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?
From: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Behalf Of Kun
Sent: Friday, August 6, 2021 6:49 AMFirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm.inf now?
To: email@example.com; Bi, Dandan <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
Cc: Wu, Hao A <email@example.com>; Wang, Jian J
<firstname.lastname@example.org>; gaoliming <email@example.com>; Yao,
Jiewen <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Bret Barkelew
<Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>; 'Sean Brogan'
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Is there any use case of
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
Is there any plan to support a Standalone instance once thecollect
traditional MM version is functional?
On 08/05/2021 04:44, Dandan Bi wrote:
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
Standalone MM performance data and report the data to
FirmwarePerformanceStandaloneMm like the
for SMM core?
3. I plan to move some logic from FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm
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.
SMM performance data collection now:
1. SmmCorePerformanceLib collect all the performance data in SMM and
report the data to FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm through status
2. DxeCorePerformanceLib will communicate with
FirmwarePerformanceDataTableSmm to get the SMM performance
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
get the SMM performance data from SmmCorePerformanceLib and
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.