Hi Alex > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexander Graf [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 6:11 PM > To: Udit Kumar <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Arm.ebbr-discuss] [PATCH] Issue#10 Add EBBR compliance test > > On 05/23/2018 12:14 AM, Udit Kumar wrote: > > This patch adds a appendix for EBBR compliance test. > > > > Signed-off-by: Udit Kumar <[email protected]> > > --- > > source/ebbr.rst | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/source/ebbr.rst b/source/ebbr.rst index 40f03f1..880f126 > > 100644 > > --- a/source/ebbr.rst > > +++ b/source/ebbr.rst > > @@ -557,6 +557,22 @@ Service UEFI ยง > > EFI_ISCSI_INITIATOR_NAME_PROTOCOL 16.2 > > ========================================== ====== > > > > +******************************************* > > +APPENDIX E - EBBR Compliance Tests > > +******************************************* > > + > > +UEFI Self Certification Tests (SCT) test the UEFI implementation. > > +EBBR is leveraging from UEFI, UEFI SCT test suites check for > > +compliance against the EBBR specification. > > +To build UEFI SCT, please refer > > +https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi > > +thub.com%2FUEFI%2FUEFI- > SCT&data=02%7C01%7Cudit.kumar%40nxp.com%7C5ed7 > > > +d13d31d44f31617908d5c0aa62ba%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635% > 7C0%7 > > > +C0%7C636626760411185960&sdata=Lg1H2PRYE%2BB%2FqOutUdamcZDghsxe > xFbdTBO > > +OuUpmVnE%3D&reserved=0 > > Please reword the above to something that is easier to read (and grammatically > correct). I also think you may want to structure it from big picture to small
Sure, I will reword > picture. So you should first mention that EBBR will need multiple compliance > test Could you help me here, which other compliance test you are thinking > pieces to run and only then mention SCT as the method to verify UEFI > compliance. > > + > > +EBBR is very flexible and many features are platform dependent. > > +Therefore platform owner can decide, to implement and test optional > features > > +with UEFI SCT. > > I think a lot of the requirements that get put into this document can be > generically verified, so I wouldn't wave it off that quickly as "it's > flexible, so someone may or may not test things". I meant here, feature like RTC, Secure boot etc are marked as optional But mandatory features (which are part of appendix above) must be verified. > Instead, I'd rather > like to see a reference in here that a test kit for EBBR is in > development and will probably not be finished in time for EBBR 1.0, but > is expected at a later point. Having test kit a great idea, We can leverage from SBBR ACS. If there is no objection then we can start with EBBR CS [compliance test suites], UEFI SCT will be part of this ? > > > Alex _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
