From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:42072) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjVNf-0005IM-DC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:32:17 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjVNV-0000tp-QP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:32:10 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37200) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gjVNR-0000oB-TF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2019 15:32:03 -0500 References: <1547566866-129386-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1547566866-129386-11-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> From: Laszlo Ersek Message-ID: <15698cec-79eb-7a17-cf70-3a8fcb7962a6@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:31:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1547566866-129386-11-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 10/14] tests: acpi: ignore SMBIOS tests when UEFI firmware is used List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Gonglei , Shannon Zhao , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , Samuel Ortiz , Andrew Jones On 01/15/19 16:41, Igor Mammedov wrote: > once FW provides a pointer to SMBIOS entry point like it does for > RSDP it should be possible to enable this one the same way. Good point, I didn't think of SMBIOS. We have the following options: (1) Use just one "test support" structure, and add more fields (such as the SMBIOS entry point) to it, beyond the RSDP1.0/RSDP2.0. For this, we should also introduce a "size" field to the table, so we don't have to extend the table between firmware and QEMU in lock-step. (2) Use a different table (with a different GUID) for exposing the SMBIOS entry point. On the firmware side, (1) would be more work now, but it would keep things simpler (and better separated) in the future. (2) would be more lazy ^W convenient now, but it would introduce more churn / possibly some code duplication in the future. In QEMU, which one would you prefer? Thanks, Laszlo > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > --- > tests/bios-tables-test.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tests/bios-tables-test.c b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > index d9efe59..a64d0c2 100644 > --- a/tests/bios-tables-test.c > +++ b/tests/bios-tables-test.c > @@ -562,8 +562,11 @@ static void test_acpi_one(const char *params, test_data *data) > } > } > > - test_smbios_entry_point(data); > - test_smbios_structs(data); > + /* TODO: make SMBIOS tests work with UEFI firmware */ > + if (!use_uefi) { > + test_smbios_entry_point(data); > + test_smbios_structs(data); > + } > > assert(!global_qtest); > qtest_quit(data->qts); >