[RFC] SBBR Test Case Additions to FWTS

[Leif Lindholm]

Hi Jeffrey,

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:00:19AM -0700, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> >Once, the above two questions have been answered and we arrive at a
> >solution which is easier to maintain, will send out a list of patches
> >related to SBBR.
> >
> >Thanks in advance for your inputs.
> 
> Can you elaborate on the motivation for adding SBBR compliance to FWTS?
> 
> SBBR is ARM specific, yet FWTS is architecture agnostic in its purpose.
> While my primary interest is ARM, it sounds like to add SBBR testing to FWTS
> requires the addition of a bunch of ARM specific tweaks that don't play well
> with other architectures.  Greater ARM support is nice, but not at the cost
> of not playing well with others.

To clarify - this isn't a "test all of SBBR compliance using FWTS"
thing, it's a "test the bits that FWTS are already looking for, but
make the absence of certain tables result in reported test failures".

The other part of SBBR compliance validation runs in a UEFI SCT
context.

> Additionally, ARM (the company) has already published a SBBR compliance test
> at https://github.com/ARM-software/arm-enterprise-acs
> 
> Why duplicate that in FWTS?

Because that compliance test is based to a larger extent on FWTS and
ARM does not want to maintain a non-upstream branch in perpetuity if
it can be avoided.

This pre-RFC is for investigating possibilities for getting away from
carrying patches against FWTS as part of that compliance test suite.

> >IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> >confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> >recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> >contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy
> >the information in any medium. Thank you.
> 
> I don't believe this signature is appropriate for public mailing lists.

Agreed.

Regards,

Leif