jgong5 ff443d3ebd Use on-demand paging for CpuSaveStates read/write. It was measured about 200us for either read or write the PI CpuSaveStates to framework, ~400us in total on a platform with 80 CPUs with original for loop implementation. So with on-demand paging, if the framework SMI handler doesn’t read/write CpuSaveStates, ~400us will be saved. If the handler happens to use CpuSaveStates, there will be about 20us overhead for either read or write a page which contains 5 continuous CpuSaveStates. ... git-svn-id: https://edk2.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/edk2/trunk/edk2@10328 6f19259b-4bc3-4df7-8a09-765794883524		2010-04-02 01:39:19 +00:00
..
PageFaultHandler.S	Use on-demand paging for CpuSaveStates read/write. It was measured about 200us for either read or write the PI CpuSaveStates to framework, ~400us in total on a platform with 80 CPUs with original for loop implementation. So with on-demand paging, if the framework SMI handler doesn’t read/write CpuSaveStates, ~400us will be saved. If the handler happens to use CpuSaveStates, there will be about 20us overhead for either read or write a page which contains 5 continuous CpuSaveStates.	2010-04-02 01:39:19 +00:00
PageFaultHandler.asm	Use on-demand paging for CpuSaveStates read/write. It was measured about 200us for either read or write the PI CpuSaveStates to framework, ~400us in total on a platform with 80 CPUs with original for loop implementation. So with on-demand paging, if the framework SMI handler doesn’t read/write CpuSaveStates, ~400us will be saved. If the handler happens to use CpuSaveStates, there will be about 20us overhead for either read or write a page which contains 5 continuous CpuSaveStates.	2010-04-02 01:39:19 +00:00