Patches 1 to 5, uefirtvariable: Add new test for UEFI runtime SetVariable, subtest 5

[IvanHu]

Hi Coling,

Thanks for your valuable suggestion.
I'll try to add another patch for these useful failed information.
Let me know if you have any suggestions in that coming patch. Thanks!

Cheers,
Ivan

On 12/05/2012 07:57 PM, Colin Ian King wrote:
> Thanks Ivan for the UEFI runtime SetVariable tests.
>
> I've ACK'd these tests as they exercise the SetVariable runtime well
> enough.  I suspect we may need to re-visit these at a later date and
> perhaps had some more feedback to the user in the event of failures.
>
> For example, setvariable_insertvariable reports back:
>
> "Failed to set variable with UEFI runtime service."
>
> ..which is useful to know the that something failed, but I think we
> could expand this a little more. For example, maybe we could add some
> more feedback to the user such as the length of the variable name, size
> of the data, it's attributes, etc.   Imagine if you are running the test
> and you get a failed error - what does that relate to? As a user, it
> could perhaps be useful to know.
>
> Also, let's look at patch 2, uefirtvariable_test1(), you added:
>
>
> +    for (index = 0; index < (sizeof(attributesarray)/(sizeof
> attributesarray[0])); index++) {
> +        if (setvariable_test2(fw, attributesarray[index],
> variablenametest) == FWTS_ERROR)
> +            return FWTS_ERROR;
> +    }
>
> Note that one can add multiple fwts_passed() and fwts_failed() messages
> in the test, so for each of these minor tests you could feedback a
> fwts_passed() message..
>
> e.g.
>
>      fwts_log_info(fw, "Testing SetVariable on a variable with two
> different sizes.");
>          .. do the setvariable_test2() testss..
>      for (index = 0; index < ... etc) {
>          if (setvariable_test2(fw, ...) == FWTS_ERROR)
>              return FWTS_FAILED;
>
>          fwts_passed(fw, "SetVariable on a variable with two different
> sizes passed.");
>
> Anyhow, I'm OK with the tests as they are, but perhaps we should
> re-visit them and add a little more feedback if it doesn't clutter up
> the output too much.
>
> Colin
>