On 24.05.18 12:14, Udit Kumar wrote:
Hi Alex
-----Original Message----- From: Alexander Graf [mailto:agraf@suse.de] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 6:11 PM To: Udit Kumar udit.kumar@nxp.com; boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org; arm.ebbr-discuss@arm.com 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 udit.kumar@nxp.com
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
I don't think we have any yet beyond SCT, but I'm sure we will have to have more, so the section should account for that :).
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 ?
If you want to take the lead on this, be my guest :).
Alex