From: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
To: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org>,
Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>,
U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@lists.denx.de>,
Patrick Delaunay <patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@foss.st.com>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@csgraf.de>, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
Jose Marinho <jose.marinho@arm.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@arm.com>,
Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@linaro.org>,
Sughosh Ganu <sughosh.ganu@linaro.org>,
Paul Liu <paul.liu@linaro.org>, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/py: efi_capsule: Handle expected reset after capsule on disk
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 10:15:50 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220219011550.GB6672@laputa> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b6903e46-26d6-4ca0-cdb8-a2b9f622fe36@gmx.de>
On Fri, Feb 18, 2022 at 02:48:54PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 2/18/22 03:16, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> > Thank you for your reply.
> >
> > 2022年2月18日(金) 2:56 Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Masami,
> > >
> > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 at 18:11, Masami Hiramatsu
> > > <masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Simon,
> > > >
> > > > Let me confirm your point.
> > > > So are you concerning the 'real' reset for the capsule update test
> > > > case itself or this patch?
> > > >
> > > > I'm actually learning how the test is working, so please help me to
> > > > understand how I can solve it.
> > > >
> > > > There are 3 environments to run the test, sandbox, Qemu, and a real board.
> > > > If we reset a sandbox, it will continue to run (just restart itself),
> > >
> > > Here you should be able to avoid doing a reset. See
> > > dm_test_sysreset_base() which tests sysreset drivers on sandbox.
> >
> > Would you mean that reset-after-capsule-on-disk itself should not
> > make a reset on sandbox?
>
> We have several tests that do resets by calling do_reset(), e.g. the
> UEFI unit tests. There is nothing wrong about it.
>
> We want the sandbox to behave like any other board where capsule updates
> lead to resets.
>
> >
> > In dm_test_sysreset_base(), I can see the below code, this means
> > sysreset_request()
> > will not execute real reset, but just mimic the reset, right?
> >
> > state->sysreset_allowed[SYSRESET_WARM] = true;
> > ut_asserteq(-EINPROGRESS, sysreset_request(dev, SYSRESET_WARM));
> > state->sysreset_allowed[SYSRESET_WARM] = false;
> >
> > > > but Qemu and real board will cause a real reset and it will terminate
> > > > the qemu or stop the board (depends on how it is implemented). Thus,
> > > > if a command or boot process will cause a reset, it will need a
> > > > special care (maybe respawn?).
> > >
> > > Here you need to worry about the surrounding automation logic which
> > > could be tbot of the U-Boot pytest hooks. I suggest you avoid this and
> > > handle it some other way, without reset.
>
> The sandbox should run through exactly the same code path as all other
> boards to get a meaningful test results. Therefore don't put in any
> quirks on C level. Your Python test changes are all that is needed.
+1, I have the same opinion here.
To exercise capsule-on-disk code, we need a "real" reset
because pytest/CI loop is basically a black-box test.
-Takahiro Akashi
>
> Best regards
>
> Heinrich
>
> >
> > Hmm, would you mean adding a runtime flag to sandbox so that
> > it will not does real reset but just showing some token on console like
> > "sandbox fake reset done." ?
> >
> >
> > > > Since the capsule update testcase only runs on sandbox, it will not
> > > > cause real reset. But maybe it is possible to support running on Qemu.
> > >
> > > Maybe, but I don't think you should worry about that, at least for
> > > now. The sandbox test is enough.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Current my test patch (and capsule update testcase itself) doesn't
> > > > handle the real reset case correctly even on Qemu. The Qemu needs
> > > > spawn a new instance and re-connect the console when the reset
> > > > happens.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If so, I think there are 2 issues to be solved.
> > > > 1. change the capsule update testcase runable on Qemu
> > > > 2. change my patch to handle the real reset correctly (not only
> > > > waiting for the next boot, but also respawn it again)
> > > >
> > > > Do I understand correctly?
> > >
> > > I think the best approach is to get your test running on sandbox, with
> > > the faked reset. Don't worry about the other cases as we don't support
> > > them.
> >
> > OK.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Simon
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > >
> > > > 2022年2月17日(木) 2:53 Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org>:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Heinrich,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 at 10:50, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2/16/22 16:46, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 04:32:40PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > > > > > > > On 2/16/22 16:26, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Masami,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 at 02:05, Masami Hiramatsu
> > > > > > > > > <masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Since now the capsule_on_disk will restart the u-boot sandbox right
> > > > > > > > > > after the capsule update, if CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_ON_DISK_EARLY=y, the
> > > > > > > > > > boot with a new capsule file will repeat reboot sequence. On the
> > > > > > > > > > other hand, if CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_ON_DISK_EARLY=n, the 'env print -e'
> > > > > > > > > > command will execute the capsule update on disk and reboot.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thus this update the uboot_console for those 2 cases;
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > - restart_uboot(): Add expect_earlyreset optional parameter so that
> > > > > > > > > > it can handle the reboot while booting.
> > > > > > > > > > - run_command(): Add wait_for_reboot optional parameter so that it
> > > > > > > > > > can handle the reboot after executing a command.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > And enable those options in the test_capsule_firmware.py test cases.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org>
> > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > .../test_efi_capsule/test_capsule_firmware.py | 39 ++++++--
> > > > > > > > > > test/py/u_boot_console_base.py | 95 +++++++++++++++-----
> > > > > > > > > > test/py/u_boot_console_sandbox.py | 6 +
> > > > > > > > > > 3 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We have a means to avoid actually doing the reset, see the reset driver.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The UEFI specification requires a cold reset after a capsule is updated
> > > > > > > > and before the console is reached. How could the reset driver help to
> > > > > > > > fix the Python tests?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is this test going to be able to run on qemu, sandbox, real hardware, or
> > > > > > > all 3? The tests may well end up having to know a bit more, sadly,
> > > > > > > about the type of system they're testing.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > Currently the test will only run on the sandbox in Gitlab (see usage of
> > > > > > @pytest.mark.boardspec('sandbox') in test/py/tests/test_efi_capsule/).
> > > > >
> > > > > Let me know if you need help reworking this patch to operate on
> > > > > sandbox without a 'real' reset.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Simon
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Masami Hiramatsu
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Masami Hiramatsu
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-19 1:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-03 9:23 [PATCH v4 0/2] EFI: Reset system after capsule-on-disk Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-03 9:23 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] efi_loader: use efi_update_capsule_firmware() for capsule on disk Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-13 8:58 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-03 9:23 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] efi_loader: Reset system after CapsuleUpdate " Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-09 3:13 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-02-09 3:54 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-13 9:01 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-13 10:17 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-14 1:06 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-02-14 2:39 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-15 9:05 ` [PATCH] test/py: efi_capsule: Handle expected reset after capsule " Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-15 9:09 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-15 13:51 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-15 13:52 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-15 14:15 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-15 23:50 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-16 1:34 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-02-16 1:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-16 15:26 ` Simon Glass
2022-02-16 15:32 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-16 15:46 ` Tom Rini
2022-02-16 17:45 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-16 17:51 ` Tom Rini
2022-02-16 17:52 ` Simon Glass
2022-02-17 1:11 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-17 17:55 ` Simon Glass
2022-02-18 2:16 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-18 13:48 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-19 1:15 ` AKASHI Takahiro [this message]
2022-03-12 2:24 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-13 14:00 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-13 22:23 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-14 1:08 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-03-14 2:15 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-14 2:42 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-03-14 6:45 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-14 7:35 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-14 8:03 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-03-14 18:24 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-15 0:40 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-15 5:02 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-03-15 5:04 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-15 8:36 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-16 3:13 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-16 3:26 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2022-03-16 6:09 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-16 19:23 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-16 20:41 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-03-17 0:29 ` Simon Glass
2022-02-18 13:59 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2022-02-18 14:11 ` Tom Rini
2022-02-19 4:18 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-18 16:50 ` Tom Rini
2022-02-16 17:46 ` Simon Glass
2022-02-26 18:37 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] efi_loader: Reset system after CapsuleUpdate " Simon Glass
2022-02-28 4:19 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-02-28 7:53 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2022-03-01 14:58 ` Simon Glass
2022-03-02 1:58 ` Masami Hiramatsu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220219011550.GB6672@laputa \
--to=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=agraf@csgraf.de \
--cc=bmeng.cn@gmail.com \
--cc=etienne.carriere@linaro.org \
--cc=grant.likely@arm.com \
--cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=jose.marinho@arm.com \
--cc=masami.hiramatsu@linaro.org \
--cc=patrice.chotard@foss.st.com \
--cc=patrick.delaunay@foss.st.com \
--cc=paul.liu@linaro.org \
--cc=sjg@chromium.org \
--cc=sughosh.ganu@linaro.org \
--cc=trini@konsulko.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
--cc=xypron.glpk@gmx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox