Hi Tom, On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 19:54, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 07:00:35PM +0200, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 16:02, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:15:46PM +0200, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 at 19:32, Tom Rini <tr...@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 <tr...@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 <s...@chromium.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Here is the patch to avoid sudo and CI fallback: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/ > > > > > > > > 20240802093322.15240-1-rich...@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. > > > > > > Erm, are you saying the BOOT/EFI/BOOTSBOX.EFI file that's in > > > test/py/tests/bootstd/flash1.img.xz doesn't need to exist and the test > > > replaces that, as it goes? > > > > No, I'm saying that sandbox uses that file, no matter the host > > architecture, and I don't need to create different versions of > > flash1.im.xz for each host architecture. > > > > I discussed this with Heinrich and he seems happy enough with the -N > > flag for his use case. I know how to replicate his use case and am > > going to try it soon. > > Yes, I'm just confused as to how the same BOOTSBOX.EFI binary file can > be executed as both x86-64 and aarch64. Because: > $ xz -k -d test/py/tests/bootstd/flash1.img.xz > $ sudo losetup -fP test/py/tests/bootstd/flash1.img > $ sudo mount -o ro /dev/loop18p1 /mnt > $ file /mnt/EFI/BOOT/BOOTSBOX.EFI > /mnt/EFI/BOOT/BOOTSBOX.EFI: PE32+ executable (EFI application) x86-64 > (stripped to external PDB), for MS Windows, 5 sections > > Seems unlikely to work on an aarch64 host. Which is why I asked if the > test actually replaced the contents of the file.
Well, yes, for now the .xz is an x86_64 image, but I expect to be able to get rid of that fallback once my EFI test lands, so it should work fine on ARM. Regards, Simon
