[U-Boot] [PATCH v9 00/18] efi: Enable sandbox support for EFI loader

[Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>]

On 08.08.18 11:54, Simon Glass wrote:
> A limitation of the EFI loader at present is that it does not build with
> sandbox. This makes it hard to write tests, since sandbox is used for most
> testing in U-Boot.
> 
> This series enables the EFI loader feature. It allows sandbox to build and
> run a trivial function which calls the EFI API to output a message.
> 
> Also included in v8 is support for running the full EFI self tests. These
> run OK with some tweaks to a few parts of the code.
> 
> With v9, various EFI patches have been applied which change things. This
> series includes a partial review of one, which makes 'bootefi test' work.
> But there are still problems with 'bootefi selftest':
> 
> $ sandbox/u-boot -D -c "bootefi selftest"
> ...
> Executing 'block device'
> /home/sjg/c/src/third_party/u-boot/files/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_block_device.c(385):
> TODO: Wrong volume label 'xxa1', expected 'U-BOOT TEST'
> map_to_sysmem: Added map from 00007ffd0782d2a0 to 8000000
> phys_to_virt: Used map from 8000000 to 00007ffd0782d2a0
> writing /u-boot.txt
> find_tag: Used map from 00007ffd0782d2a0 to 8000000
> phys_to_virt: Used map from 8000000 to 00007ffd0782d2a0
> /home/sjg/c/src/third_party/u-boot/files/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_block_device.c(458):
> ERROR: Unexpected file content
> /home/sjg/c/src/third_party/u-boot/files/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest.c(109):
> ERROR: Executing 'block device' failed
> 
> ...
> 
> Executing 'simple network protocol'
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> DHCP Discover
> /home/sjg/c/src/third_party/u-boot/files/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_snp.c(311):
> ERROR: Timeout occurred
> /home/sjg/c/src/third_party/u-boot/files/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest.c(109):
> ERROR: Executing 'simple network protocol' failed
> 
> This series is at u-boot-dm/efi-working

Thanks a lot again for pushing this forward.

My ultimate goal is that sandbox is not a special case, but just "yet
another" target we support.

That means things like a special "bootefi test" command really don't
make any sense and should just go.

The other thing we need to make sure is that every divergence we find
between sandbox and non-sandbox behavior potentially hints at a real
problem:

  - If exit doesn't work, don't just disable it, instead please debug
why and resolve it for real.

  - If tests are failing that really shouldn't fail, please figure out
why. Maybe they used the stack in some cases which breaks your mapping
logic?

At the end of the day, I want to have as little divergence between the
sandbox target and a real x86_64 QEMU target for example. As long as we
don't exit boot services, both should really behave the same.


Alex