On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 16:08:42 +0800 Wei Yang <richardw.y...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 07:34:44AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > >For testcase to use UEFI firmware, one needs to provide and specify > >firmwarei and varstore blobs names in test_data { uefi_fl1, uefi_fl2) } > ^ > a typo here? fixed > >fields respectively and RAM start address plus size where to look for > >test structure signature. Additionally testcase should specify > >bootable cdrom image uefi-boot-images EFI test utility. > > > >Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > >Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > >--- > >v3: > > * drop data_dir prefix and firmware will come from pc-bios directly > > * add cdrom option so test could use it for providing boot cdrom image > > * add TODO comment convert '-drive if=pflash' to new syntax (Laszlo) > >v2: > > * move RAM start address and size to test_data, as it could differ > > between boards (and even versions) > >--- > > tests/bios-tables-test.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/tests/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > >index 5790ee4..0f24540 100644 > >--- a/tests/bios-tables-test.c > >+++ b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > >@@ -26,6 +26,11 @@ > > typedef struct { > > const char *machine; > > const char *variant; > >+ const char *uefi_fl1; > >+ const char *uefi_fl2; > >+ const char *cd; > >+ const uint64_t ram_start; > >+ const uint64_t scan_len; > > uint64_t rsdp_addr; > > uint8_t rsdp_table[36 /* ACPI 2.0+ RSDP size */]; > > GArray *tables; > >@@ -522,21 +527,40 @@ static void test_smbios_structs(test_data *data) > > static void test_acpi_one(const char *params, test_data *data) > > { > > char *args; > >- > >- /* Disable kernel irqchip to be able to override apic irq0. */ > >- args = g_strdup_printf("-machine %s,accel=%s,kernel-irqchip=off " > >- "-net none -display none %s " > >- "-drive id=hd0,if=none,file=%s,format=raw " > >- "-device ide-hd,drive=hd0 ", > >- data->machine, "kvm:tcg", > >- params ? params : "", disk); > >+ bool use_uefi = data->uefi_fl1 && data->uefi_fl2; > >+ > >+ if (use_uefi) { > >+ /* > >+ * TODO: convert '-drive if=pflash' to new syntax (see e33763be7cd3) > >+ * when arm/virt boad starts to support it. > >+ */ > >+ args = g_strdup_printf("-machine %s,accel=%s -nodefaults -nographic > >" > >+ "-drive if=pflash,format=raw,file=%s,readonly " > >+ "-drive if=pflash,format=raw,file=%s,snapshot=on -cdrom %s %s", > >+ data->machine, "kvm:tcg", data->uefi_fl1, data->uefi_fl2, > >+ data->cd, params ? params : ""); > >+ > >+ } else { > >+ /* Disable kernel irqchip to be able to override apic irq0. */ > >+ args = g_strdup_printf("-machine %s,accel=%s,kernel-irqchip=off " > >+ "-net none -display none %s " > >+ "-drive id=hd0,if=none,file=%s,format=raw " > >+ "-device ide-hd,drive=hd0 ", > >+ data->machine, "kvm:tcg", params ? params : "", disk); > >+ } > > > > data->qts = qtest_init(args); > > > >- boot_sector_test(data->qts); > >+ if (use_uefi) { > >+ g_assert(data->scan_len); > >+ data->rsdp_addr = acpi_find_rsdp_address_uefi(data->qts, > >+ data->ram_start, data->scan_len); > > Is this possible to merge this in test_acpi_rsdp_address()? Both of them set > the data->rsdp_addr. I didn't want to duplicate use_uefi calculation and well test_acpi_rsdp_address() isn't doing much and not reused elsewhere. I'll fold in here. > > >+ } else { > >+ boot_sector_test(data->qts); > >+ test_acpi_rsdp_address(data); > >+ } > > > > data->tables = g_array_new(false, true, sizeof(AcpiSdtTable)); > >- test_acpi_rsdp_address(data); > > test_acpi_rsdp_table(data); > > test_acpi_rxsdt_table(data); > > test_acpi_fadt_table(data); > >-- > >2.7.4 >