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 <imammedo@redhat.com>
---
 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",
+            data->machine, "kvm:tcg", data_dir, data->uefi_fl1, data_dir,
+            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);
+    } 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);
-- 
2.7.4

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 <imammedo@redhat.com>
> ---
>  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.

> +            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.

> +            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?

> +    } 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

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:18:18 +0100
Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> 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 <imammedo@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  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