Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter

Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
---
 .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
 .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)

diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
--- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
+++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
@@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
 #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
 #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
+//
+// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor CPU feature
+// with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function. 
+//
 #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)

 #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
 #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
--- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
+++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
@@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
 }
 
 /**
+  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
+
+  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
+
+  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
+  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
+**/
+BOOLEAN
+IsFeatureValidCheck (
+  IN UINT32        Feature
+  )
+{
+  UINT32      Data;
+
+  Data = Feature;
+  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER | CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
+  //
+  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
+  //
+  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
+    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
+    return FALSE;
+  }
+  return TRUE;
+}
+
+/**
   Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature bit mask buffer.
 
   @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
@@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
 
   VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
   Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
+  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
   while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
     ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
                     != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
-- 
2.10.2.windows.1

_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

Reviewed-by: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>

-----Original Message-----
From: Song, BinX 
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 4:16 PM
To: edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Cc: Dong, Eric; lersek@redhat.com
Subject: [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid RegisterCpuFeature parameter

Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter

Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
---
 .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
 .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)

diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
--- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
+++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
@@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
 #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
 #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
+//
+// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor CPU 
+feature // with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function.
+//
 #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)

 #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
 #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
--- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
+++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
@@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
 }
 
 /**
+  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
+
+  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
+
+  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
+  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
+**/
+BOOLEAN
+IsFeatureValidCheck (
+  IN UINT32        Feature
+  )
+{
+  UINT32      Data;
+
+  Data = Feature;
+  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER | 
+CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
+  //
+  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
+  //
+  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
+    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
+    return FALSE;
+  }
+  return TRUE;
+}
+
+/**
   Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature bit mask buffer.
 
   @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
@@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
 
   VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
   Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
+  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
   while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
     ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
                     != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
--
2.10.2.windows.1

_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

On 12/11/2017 4:16 PM, Song, BinX wrote:
> Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter
> 
> Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
> ---
>   .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
>   .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>   2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
>   #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
>   #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
> +//
> +// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor CPU feature
> +// with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function.
> +//
>   #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)
> 
>   #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
>   #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> @@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
>   }
>   
>   /**
> +  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
> +
> +  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
> +
> +  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
> +  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
> +**/
> +BOOLEAN
> +IsFeatureValidCheck (
Can we rename this function name to
"RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?


> +  IN UINT32        Feature
> +  )
> +{
> +  UINT32      Data;
> +
> +  Data = Feature;
> +  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER | CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
> +  //
> +  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we support?


> +  //
> +  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
> +    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
> +    return FALSE;
> +  }
> +  return TRUE;
> +}
> +
> +/**
>     Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature bit mask buffer.
>   
>     @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
> @@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
>   
>     VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
>     Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
> +  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
>     while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
>       ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
>                       != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
> 


-- 
Thanks,
Ray
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

Hi Ray,

Below is my opinions for your 2 questions:
1. Can we rename this function name to "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
[Bell]: In content of RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c, there is a function named IsBitMaskMatchCheck(), it's my function's base, they have similar function - a small valid/invalid check,
So I think it is better to keep them align.
2. Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we support?
[Bell]: Discussed with Eric before, we should not define this as a MAX feature for future extension purpose.

Best Regards,
Bell Song


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ni, Ruiyu
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:40 PM
> To: Song, BinX <binx.song@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid RegisterCpuFeature
> parameter
> 
> On 12/11/2017 4:16 PM, Song, BinX wrote:
> > Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter
> >
> > Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> > Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
> > ---
> >   .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
> >   .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
> > --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
> >   #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
> >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
> > +//
> > +// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor CPU
> feature
> > +// with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function.
> > +//
> >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)
> >
> >   #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
> >   #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
> > diff --git
> a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
> > ---
> a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > +++
> b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > @@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
> >   }
> >
> >   /**
> > +  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
> > +
> > +  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
> > +
> > +  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
> > +  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
> > +**/
> > +BOOLEAN
> > +IsFeatureValidCheck (
> Can we rename this function name to
> "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
> 
> 
> > +  IN UINT32        Feature
> > +  )
> > +{
> > +  UINT32      Data;
> > +
> > +  Data = Feature;
> > +  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER |
> CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
> > +  //
> > +  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
> Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we
> support?
> 
> 
> > +  //
> > +  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
> > +    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
> > +    return FALSE;
> > +  }
> > +  return TRUE;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> >     Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature bit mask
> buffer.
> >
> >     @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
> > @@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
> >
> >     VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
> >     Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
> > +  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
> >     while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
> >       ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
> >                       != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Thanks,
> Ray
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Song, BinX
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 6:00 PM
> To: Ni, Ruiyu <ruiyu.ni@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid RegisterCpuFeature
> parameter
> 
> Hi Ray,
> 
> Below is my opinions for your 2 questions:
> 1. Can we rename this function name to
> "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
> [Bell]: In content of RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c, there is a function named
> IsBitMaskMatchCheck(), it's my function's base, they have similar function - a
> small valid/invalid check, So I think it is better to keep them align.
The original function name IsXXXXCheck() is not good. Please do not follow the
same naming style. 

> 2. Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we
> support?
> [Bell]: Discussed with Eric before, we should not define this as a MAX feature
> for future extension purpose.
I didn't mean to define a new MAX macro.
You just need to update the comments. 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Bell Song
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ni, Ruiyu
> > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:40 PM
> > To: Song, BinX <binx.song@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> > Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid
> > RegisterCpuFeature parameter
> >
> > On 12/11/2017 4:16 PM, Song, BinX wrote:
> > > Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter
> > >
> > > Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> > > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> > > Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >   .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
> > >   .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
> > > --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
> > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
> > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
> > > +//
> > > +// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor CPU
> > feature
> > > +// with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function.
> > > +//
> > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)
> > >
> > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
> > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
> > > diff --git
> > a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
> > > ---
> > a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > +++
> > b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > @@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
> > >   }
> > >
> > >   /**
> > > +  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
> > > +
> > > +  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
> > > +
> > > +  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
> > > +  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
> > > +**/
> > > +BOOLEAN
> > > +IsFeatureValidCheck (
> > Can we rename this function name to
> > "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
> >
> >
> > > +  IN UINT32        Feature
> > > +  )
> > > +{
> > > +  UINT32      Data;
> > > +
> > > +  Data = Feature;
> > > +  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER |
> > CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
> > > +  //
> > > +  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
> > Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we
> > support?
> >
> >
> > > +  //
> > > +  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
> > > +    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
> > > +    return FALSE;
> > > +  }
> > > +  return TRUE;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > >     Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature
> > > bit mask
> > buffer.
> > >
> > >     @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
> > > @@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
> > >
> > >     VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
> > >     Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
> > > +  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
> > >     while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
> > >       ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
> > >                       != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Ray
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel

Hi Ray,

Got it, I will update a V2 patch.

Best Regards,
Bell Song

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ni, Ruiyu
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 4:44 PM
> To: Song, BinX <binx.song@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid RegisterCpuFeature
> parameter
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Song, BinX
> > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 6:00 PM
> > To: Ni, Ruiyu <ruiyu.ni@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> > Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > Subject: RE: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid RegisterCpuFeature
> > parameter
> >
> > Hi Ray,
> >
> > Below is my opinions for your 2 questions:
> > 1. Can we rename this function name to
> > "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
> > [Bell]: In content of RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c, there is a function named
> > IsBitMaskMatchCheck(), it's my function's base, they have similar function -
> a
> > small valid/invalid check, So I think it is better to keep them align.
> The original function name IsXXXXCheck() is not good. Please do not follow
> the
> same naming style.
> 
> > 2. Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we
> > support?
> > [Bell]: Discussed with Eric before, we should not define this as a MAX
> feature
> > for future extension purpose.
> I didn't mean to define a new MAX macro.
> You just need to update the comments.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Bell Song
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ni, Ruiyu
> > > Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:40 PM
> > > To: Song, BinX <binx.song@intel.com>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> > > Cc: lersek@redhat.com; Dong, Eric <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [edk2] [PATCH] UefiCpuPkg: Check invalid
> > > RegisterCpuFeature parameter
> > >
> > > On 12/11/2017 4:16 PM, Song, BinX wrote:
> > > > Check and assert invalid RegisterCpuFeature function parameter
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Eric Dong <eric.dong@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> > > > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
> > > > Signed-off-by: Bell Song <binx.song@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   .../Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h       |  4 ++++
> > > >   .../RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c                       | 28
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >   2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > > index 9331e49..54244cd 100644
> > > > --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > > +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Include/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.h
> > > > @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@
> > > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_ENERGY_PERFORMANCE_BIAS         (32+10)
> > > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PPIN                            (32+11)
> > > > +//
> > > > +// When you add new CPU features, please also replace the minor
> CPU
> > > feature
> > > > +// with the max CPU feature in the IsFeatureValidCheck() function.
> > > > +//
> > > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE                      (32+12)
> > > >
> > > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL                      BIT27
> > > >   #define CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL                       BIT28
> > > > diff --git
> > > a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > > index dd6a82b..f75d900 100644
> > > > ---
> > > a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > > +++
> > > b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib/RegisterCpuFeaturesLib.c
> > > > @@ -81,6 +81,33 @@ DumpCpuFeature (
> > > >   }
> > > >
> > > >   /**
> > > > +  Determines if the CPU feature is valid.
> > > > +
> > > > +  @param[in]  Feature        Pointer to CPU feature
> > > > +
> > > > +  @retval TRUE  The CPU feature is valid.
> > > > +  @retval FALSE The CPU feature is invalid.
> > > > +**/
> > > > +BOOLEAN
> > > > +IsFeatureValidCheck (
> > > Can we rename this function name to
> > > "RegisterCpuFeatureLibIsFeatureValid"?
> > >
> > >
> > > > +  IN UINT32        Feature
> > > > +  )
> > > > +{
> > > > +  UINT32      Data;
> > > > +
> > > > +  Data = Feature;
> > > > +  Data &= ~(CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER |
> > > CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE_ALL | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER_ALL);
> > > > +  //
> > > > +  // Please replace CPU feature below with the MAX one if have.
> > > Can we just say "CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE" is the MAX feature we
> > > support?
> > >
> > >
> > > > +  //
> > > > +  if (Data > CPU_FEATURE_PROC_TRACE) {
> > > > +    DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "Invalid CPU feature: 0x%x ", Feature));
> > > > +    return FALSE;
> > > > +  }
> > > > +  return TRUE;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +/**
> > > >     Determines if the feature bit mask is in dependent CPU feature
> > > > bit mask
> > > buffer.
> > > >
> > > >     @param[in]  FeatureMask        Pointer to CPU feature bit mask
> > > > @@ -444,6 +471,7 @@ RegisterCpuFeature (
> > > >
> > > >     VA_START (Marker, InitializeFunc);
> > > >     Feature = VA_ARG (Marker, UINT32);
> > > > +  ASSERT (IsFeatureValidCheck(Feature));
> > > >     while (Feature != CPU_FEATURE_END) {
> > > >       ASSERT ((Feature & (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE |
> CPU_FEATURE_AFTER))
> > > >                       != (CPU_FEATURE_BEFORE | CPU_FEATURE_AFTER));
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ray
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel