From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E1C0C433F5 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 18:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230078AbiJESUp (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:20:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38346 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229917AbiJESUo (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:20:44 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BFEF72B58 for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 11:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id u24so9094331plq.12 for ; Wed, 05 Oct 2022 11:20:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=b6zzNw/YjH3RxSUvMPTYr8To/FV4imd1UZZMrOjTqao=; b=ewr67jbi1lQIleM8nptOdHKnoaAk1apDGASF7WlKrATX0r/jv5thVXkvNu6T2Io2Qz FJHfFxvKtj4dnMXVVIg9CTEBtMYnNxfwqK2oKhCJ3Jx3e2y4qrhK4ur5XzqADOvB5ROZ +mfTo2KxFTZ7TX+AK0PxBK7iF/meIsd8bJWIHR7Q/ywf+LKbWfPEmGI4hqeBTQM/LvwO WlOCJbv1sfZhsKv5fy5VOLWIiwQUh89WzR1S2xbyS3XhI2YOibbUroXfX/c9BDq7B57U +z0AINN3Efqc06dNzAVEiUtr/4nGov8EKW8Ydn8VIyR7Q5aPSYbDNFOcnMMGlALWBUeO klFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=b6zzNw/YjH3RxSUvMPTYr8To/FV4imd1UZZMrOjTqao=; b=Ez0ednCJvZDo1UVsgeCJE2ya/K4UjwzXkPWW2ml6NhK15K5AjUVwXcfwYw7OU0EkTf 8vVpKXsXax9+I46MWr8YEMetWVdf6JOEMhlKXbtW37uLA44svBRZhv2KeWc8Ag/lrJOQ 9VQXhQk1CH9I9p/PY7TK9KKemz99XB87xsIiIF362GqekbSySkuWXcJofI6gZLKWdYwo Bz5SbPHZ1zCJu/qyOoOMeun+ZRFOs4OQlZeSfuY36f+R6Tm0n2frOW1FpLW92ilPJkwg 3F1EbwaAd4WRasH13K0iD2nLhMBRb8/ri1SqpfR9OXWGcDtq13oX8xVNI/k9FY4o4xzV oEEA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3N+qyLfhiyeD0PAWHpicVIy0W5PFZdYdg6d1qnJjKJzXAMohqa PK8c7u26mMcHdd0RHODYFlO9Wg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM62Fch38nQ+xgGrRlTYEiO2c1L4XNclfYribautCoNr6damcDJC7SHKc+pc0Rst1dkMVvDxdA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:11cf:b0:178:a8f4:d511 with SMTP id q15-20020a17090311cf00b00178a8f4d511mr937878plh.72.1664994041964; Wed, 05 Oct 2022 11:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (7.104.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.104.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i10-20020a170902cf0a00b00177f25f8ab3sm10803052plg.89.2022.10.05.11.20.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 Oct 2022 11:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 18:20:37 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Zixuan Wang Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, shankaran@fb.com, somnathc@fb.com, marcorr@google.com, varad.gautam@suse.com, jroedel@suse.de, bp@suse.de, zxwang42@gmail.com Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests RFC PATCH 1/5] efi: Compile standalone binaries for EFI Message-ID: References: <20220816175413.3553795-1-zxwang@fb.com> <20220816175413.3553795-2-zxwang@fb.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220816175413.3553795-2-zxwang@fb.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 16, 2022, Zixuan Wang wrote: > Currently the standalone binaries do not work with EFI as the scripts > are not aware of EFI-related files. More specifically, the scripts only > search for .flat files, but EFI binaries are .efi files. > > This patch fixes this by introducing a new 'efi' option for Avoid this patch, and phrase changelogs as command. E.g. Introduce an "efi" option in unittests.cfg > unittests.cfg. This patch does not contain any modifications to use this > new efi option. Those updates will be folded into the follow-up patch. > > Signed-off-by: Zixuan Wang > --- > scripts/common.bash | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > scripts/mkstandalone.sh | 17 ++++++++++++++++- > x86/unittests.cfg | 3 +++ > 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/common.bash b/scripts/common.bash > index 7b983f7..7af9d62 100644 > --- a/scripts/common.bash > +++ b/scripts/common.bash > @@ -1,5 +1,21 @@ > source config.mak > > +function unittest_enabled() > +{ > + test_name="$1" > + test_efi="$2" > + > + if [ -z "${test_name}" ]; then > + false > + elif [ "${CONFIG_EFI}" == "y" ] && [ "${test_efi}" == "no" ]; then > + false > + elif [ "${CONFIG_EFI}" == "n" ] && [ "${test_efi}" == "only" ]; then Having to tag every test as EFI-friendly is going to get annoying, and without context it's not super obvious that "efi = yes" means EFI-friendly _and_ legacy- friendly. Rather than "efi = {yes,no,only}", what about "efi = {unsupported,required}"? I.e. tag only tests that don't support all flavors of firmware.