IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
According to VTd spec, Software writes the value read from this
field (F) to Clear it. But current code is using 0 to clear the
field, that is incorrect.
And R_FSTS_REG register value clearing should be not in the for loop.
Cc: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1
Signed-off-by: Star Zeng <star.zeng@intel.com>
---
IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c b/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c
index 8dbc83fa2d67..e564d373c756 100644
--- a/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c
+++ b/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c
@@ -554,11 +554,13 @@ DumpVtdIfError (
for (Index = 0; Index < (UINTN)CapReg.Bits.NFR + 1; Index++) {
FrcdReg.Uint64[1] = MmioRead64 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + ((CapReg.Bits.FRO * 16) + (Index * 16) + R_FRCD_REG + sizeof(UINT64)));
if (FrcdReg.Bits.F != 0) {
- FrcdReg.Bits.F = 0;
+ //
+ // Software writes the value read from this field (F) to Clear it.
+ //
MmioWrite64 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + ((CapReg.Bits.FRO * 16) + (Index * 16) + R_FRCD_REG + sizeof(UINT64)), FrcdReg.Uint64[1]);
}
- MmioWrite32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG, MmioRead32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG));
}
+ MmioWrite32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG, MmioRead32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG));
}
}
}
--
2.7.0.windows.1
_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
Thanks to fix it. Reviewed by: jiewen.yao@intel.com thank you! Yao, Jiewen > 在 2018年6月5日,上午1:07,Zeng, Star <star.zeng@intel.com> 写道: > > According to VTd spec, Software writes the value read from this > field (F) to Clear it. But current code is using 0 to clear the > field, that is incorrect. > > And R_FSTS_REG register value clearing should be not in the for loop. > > Cc: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com> > Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 > Signed-off-by: Star Zeng <star.zeng@intel.com> > --- > IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c | 6 ++++-- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c b/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c > index 8dbc83fa2d67..e564d373c756 100644 > --- a/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c > +++ b/IntelSiliconPkg/Feature/VTd/IntelVTdDxe/VtdReg.c > @@ -554,11 +554,13 @@ DumpVtdIfError ( > for (Index = 0; Index < (UINTN)CapReg.Bits.NFR + 1; Index++) { > FrcdReg.Uint64[1] = MmioRead64 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + ((CapReg.Bits.FRO * 16) + (Index * 16) + R_FRCD_REG + sizeof(UINT64))); > if (FrcdReg.Bits.F != 0) { > - FrcdReg.Bits.F = 0; > + // > + // Software writes the value read from this field (F) to Clear it. > + // > MmioWrite64 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + ((CapReg.Bits.FRO * 16) + (Index * 16) + R_FRCD_REG + sizeof(UINT64)), FrcdReg.Uint64[1]); > } > - MmioWrite32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG, MmioRead32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG)); > } > + MmioWrite32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG, MmioRead32 (mVtdUnitInformation[Num].VtdUnitBaseAddress + R_FSTS_REG)); > } > } > } > -- > 2.7.0.windows.1 > _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
© 2016 - 2023 Red Hat, Inc.