Hi Alex, On 12 June 2018 at 08:11, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On 12.06.18 15:48, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Alex, >> >> On 12 June 2018 at 02:28, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12.06.18 07:26, Simon Glass wrote: >>>> This jumps to test code which can call directly into the EFI support. It >>>> does not need a separate image so it is easy to write tests with it. >>>> >>>> This test can be executed without causing problems to the run-time >>>> environemnt (e.g. U-Boot does not need to reboot afterwards). >>>> >>>> For now the test just outputs a message. To try it: >>>> >>>> ./sandbox/u-boot -c "bootefi test" >>>> U-Boot 2017.09-00204-g696c9855fe (Sep 17 2017 - 16:43:53 -0600) >>>> >>>> DRAM: 128 MiB >>>> MMC: >>>> Using default environment >>>> >>>> In: serial >>>> Out: serial >>>> Err: serial >>>> SCSI: Net: No ethernet found. >>>> IDE: Bus 0: not available >>>> Found 0 disks >>>> WARNING: booting without device tree >>>> Hello, world! >>>> Test passed >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>> >>> From Heinrich's comments it sounded like it wouldn't be hard to make the >>> selftest work. That sounds more appealing to me to be honest :). >> >> Yes and in fact my hope was to run the tests automatically as part of >> 'make tests' >> >> But rather than expanding the scope of this series, can we get this in >> first? Having EFI support in sandbox is a substantial step forward. > > I agree that it would be amazing to have it in, I just want to make sure > we're walking into the right direction. And what I want to have is an > easy way to execute EFI binaries from user space :).
That's a different thing entirely from the purpose of my series. My series is designed to allow EFI applications to be *linked* with sandbox and run just like normal C code, with a full unified stack trace, etc. I think this is a very useful feature separate from running EFI binaries in user space. > > Also I don't think that sandbox support is all that far off. Heinrich's > patch should have resolved compilation, no? I don't know what it entails but Heinrich says there is a memory alignment problem to resolve. I was able to repeat his FAT failure but adding his patch and a few other tweaks. I'm happy to look at this once we have basic sandbox support available, but if Heinrich wants to take a look, he is welcome to. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot