Hi Laszlo, On 7/18/19 9:35 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 7/18/19 8:38 PM, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> On 07/18/19 17:03, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >>> On 07/18/19 12:48, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>> To avoid incoherent states when the machine resets (see but report [...]>>> (3) Using OVMF IA32X64 (including the edk2 SMM stack), I've >>> regression-tested this patch, on top of v4.1.0-rc1, with KVM. As follows: >>> >>> (3a) Normal reboot from the UEFI shell ("reset -c" command) >>> >>> (3b) Normal reboot from the Linux guest prompt ("reboot" command) >>> >>> (3c1) Reset as part of ACPI S3 suspend/resume >>> (3c2) then use "efibootmgr -n / -N" to write to pflash (by virtue of >>> setting / deleting the standardized BootNext UEFI variable) >>> >>> (3d1) Boot to setup TUI with SB enabled >>> (3d2) erase Platform Key in setup TUI (disables SB) >>> (3d3) reboot from within setup TUI >>> (3d4) proceed to UEFI shell >>> (3d5) enable SB with EnrollDefaultKeys.efi >>> (3d6) reboot from UEFI shell >>> (3d7) proceeed to Linux guest >>> (3d8) verify SB enablement (dmesg, "mokutil --sb-state") >>> >>> (As an added exercise, step (3d4) triggered an "FTW" (fault tolerant >>> write) "reclaim" (basically a defragmentation of the journaled >>> "filesystem" that the firmware keeps in the flash, as a logical "middle >>> layer"), and that worked fine too.) >>> >>> Regression-tested-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> >>> >>> >>> (4) I plan to provide R-t-b in the evening from aarch64 KVM too, using >>> the edk2 ArmVirtQemu firmware. Only the first two steps from (3) will be >>> covered (no ACPI S3, no SB). >> >> Regression-tested-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com>
Patchwork doesn't recognize your R-t-b tag: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1133671/ Should I change it for a Tested-by, or add as it? Thanks, Phil. > Thank you a lot again for all your testing, I also noted your steps and > will try to automate them. > > Best regards, > > Phil. >