Change in coreboot[master]: Documentation/Intel: Add MultiProcessorInit documentation

[Subrata Banik (Code Review)]

Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/25921 )

Change subject: Documentation/Intel: Add MultiProcessorInit documentation
......................................................................

Patch Set 3:
> (4 comments)

I agree with you on most this comments that you have put, but my only point is that, if i tries to put this implementation of creating EDK2 interface inside Coreboot to do certain thinks might not justify the purpose of adding those "foreign" interface as your words. Today coreboot code is so independent in nature so that we don;t need to talk help of such EDK2 interface to do certain things, if we really want to increase mp_init.c capability we could have done the same using native c why UEFI?

UEFI is because this implementation only targeted for Intel fsp 9th gen + designs where we might want to do few things using coreboot callback from fsp, hence i could see a direct dependencies between this implementation proposal and supporting FSP model to justify that callback using SkipMpInit=0. if i make this code into common x86 place as well, no one will use this except 9th gen + socs from intel with proper FSP support.

whats the point of keeping certain code into common when there are no user of that code expect intel native FSP support?

Hope i could able to explain my concern, i have written this document so that i can keep it anywhere but myself not very convinced about why other users will interested to make use of EFI code interface inside x86/coreboot when mp_init.c is capable of doing everything without those APIs.