[PATCH v7 6/7] test: efi: boot: Set up an image suitable for EFI testing

[Simon Glass]

Hi Tom,

On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 at 19:32, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 08:31:10AM +0200, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Sat, 19 Oct 2024 at 11:51, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 09:24:33AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > >
> > > > Create a new disk for use with tests, which contains the new 'testapp'
> > > > EFI app specifically intended for testing the EFI loader.
> > > >
> > > > Attach it to the USB device, since most testing is currently done with
> > > > mmc.
> > > >
> > > > Initially this image will be used to test the EFI bootmeth.
> > > >
> > > > Fix a stale comment in prep_mmc_bootdev() while we are here.
> > > >
> > > > For now this uses sudo and a compressed fallback file, like all the
> > > > other bootstd tests. Once this series is in, the patch which moves
> > > > this to use user-space tools will be cleaned up and re-submitted.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > Here is the patch to avoid sudo and CI fallback:
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/
> > > > 20240802093322.15240-1-richard at nod.at/
> > > >
> > > > (no changes since v1)
> > > >
> > > >  arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts           |   2 +-
> > > >  test/boot/bootdev.c                 |  18 +++++++++-
> > > >  test/boot/bootflow.c                |   2 +-
> > > >  test/py/tests/bootstd/flash1.img.xz | Bin 0 -> 5016 bytes
> > >
> > > This I think best illustrates the problem with "BOOTSBOX.EFI". This
> > > image will work for CI up until I can figure out how to get access to
> > > free arm64 servers to run some tests on and then it will fail.
> >
> > I don't believe so. Why do you think that?
>
> Because it includes the BOOTSBOX.EFI x86 binary file, and executes it?
> Or did I miss where we update the contents to include that file as we
> just built it (and so why have it included?) ?

It works fine on x86 and I'm sure it will work fine on ARM as well.
The file is built with the host compiler, just as U-Boot itself is.

>
> > BTW it would be good to get CI running on arm. I believe Linaro might
> > have some servers. I keep thinking of getting an Ampere device but so
> > far have resisted as it is UEFI with closed firmware...
>
> The problem is more, for GitLab, getting anyone to maintain and provide
> a runner and then for Azure, waiting for Microsoft to include some in
> the free tier. I think for the former, at one point I was thinking about
> using one of Oracle's always-free tier ones and for a small enough
> subset of things (like a host tools and a sandbox run) it might be fine.

OK. I suspect Ilias might be able to help.

Regards,
Simon