From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35027) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gji2H-0000yy-2Z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:03:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gji2F-0007Vj-MJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:03:00 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34884) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gji2F-0007Q5-1O for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2019 05:02:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2019 11:02:49 +0100 From: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20190116110249.7c194dfc@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <21a83c4e-056b-f749-1b66-abaa5fe51e32@redhat.com> References: <1547566866-129386-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1547566866-129386-9-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <21a83c4e-056b-f749-1b66-abaa5fe51e32@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 08/14] tests: acpi: introduce an abilty start tests with UEFI firmware List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Gonglei , Shannon Zhao , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Philippe =?UTF-8?B?TWF0aGlldS1EYXVkw6k=?= , Samuel Ortiz , Andrew Jones On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:18:18 +0100 Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 01/15/19 16:41, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > For testcase to use UEFI firmware, one needs to provide and specify > > firmware and varstore blobs names in test_data { uefi_fl1, uefi_fl2) } > > fields respectively. > > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > > --- > > tests/bios-tables-test.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > > index 8887319..d290dd2 100644 > > --- a/tests/bios-tables-test.c > > +++ b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > > @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@ > > typedef struct { > > const char *machine; > > const char *variant; > > + const char *uefi_fl1; > > + const char *uefi_fl2; > > uint64_t rsdp_addr; > > uint8_t rsdp_table[36 /* ACPI 2.0+ RSDP size */]; > > GArray *tables; > > @@ -519,21 +521,35 @@ 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) { > > + args = g_strdup_printf("-machine %s,accel=%s -nodefaults -nographic " > > + "-drive if=pflash,format=raw,file=%s/%s,readonly " > > + "-drive if=pflash,format=raw,file=%s/%s,snapshot=on %s", > > Today I Learned: about "snapshot=on". Thanks :) The command line looks good. This way one doesn't have to make images in C (which is messy), keep track of temporary images and clean up (which isn't reliable when test crashes). Makefile magic can to all of that and in a much cleaner way. > > + data->machine, "kvm:tcg", data_dir, data->uefi_fl1, data_dir, > > You could open-code "kvm:tcg" in the format string at once (unless you > turn that into a parameter in a later patch in the series). But, I see > the pre-patch code passes "kvm:tcg" as an argument too. That was my line of reasoning as well, so I've kept it for consistence with original code. If someone would insist I can throw in a separate patch to open-code it before this one. > > + data->uefi_fl2, 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) { > > + data->rsdp_addr = uefi_find_rsdp_addr(data->qts, > > + 0x40000000ULL, 128ULL * 1024 * 1024); > > I think open-coding the DRAM size is valid; after all, it depends on the > QEMU command line, and you control the QEMU command line above. However, > do we really want to open-code the DRAM base here? That's > board-specific. Should we pass that too through the "test_data" structure? I've missed this one. In addition to your suggestion, RAM size is also a good candidate for "test_data" structure. > > > + } 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); > > > > Thanks, > Laszlo