public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tian, Feng" <feng.tian@intel.com>
To: Ramesh R. <rameshr@ami.com>, edk2-devel <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>,
	"Jin, Eric" <eric.jin@intel.com>
Cc: "Tian, Feng" <feng.tian@intel.com>
Subject: Re: BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 07:24:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7F1BAD85ADEA444D97065A60D2E97EE538825C19@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <FCB618580B279147A99F061E09CFF06D8A919487@VENUS1.in.megatrends.com>

Yes, I agree it's weird. 

We are looking at this and will get back to you if we have findings.

Thanks
Feng

-----Original Message-----
From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org] On Behalf Of Ramesh R.
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 4:44 PM
To: edk2-devel <edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
Subject: [edk2] BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest

Hi,

   When the we run the "BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest" test on the NVME devices we are getting into error because of the below testing code.

    //
    // According to TCG definition, when the Security Protocol field is set to 00h, and SP
    // Specific is set to 0000h in a TRUSTED RECEIVE command, return security protocol
    // information. This Command is not associated with a security send command
    //
    Status = StorageSecurityCommand->ReceiveData (
                                       StorageSecurityCommand,
                                       BlockIo->Media->MediaId,
                                       100000000,                    // Timeout 10-sec
                                       0,                            // SecurityProtocol
                                       0,                            // SecurityProtocolSpecifcData
                                       10,                           // PayloadBufferSize,
                                       DataBuffer,                   // PayloadBuffer
                                       &RcvDataSize
                                       );
    //
    // for ATA8-ACS SecurityProtocol, 512 byte is a request
    //
    if (IsAtaDevice) {
      if((Status == EFI_DEVICE_ERROR) || (Status == EFI_WARN_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL)){
        AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
      } else {
        AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
      }
    } else {
      if((!EFI_ERROR(Status)) || (Status == EFI_WARN_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL)){
        AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
      } else {
        AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
      }
    }

For Ata devices, EFI_DEVICE_ERROR considered as valid error case and for the Nvme ( Non ATA) device it's considered as error. Could you please let us know why there is difference in this case ?.

Thanks,
Ramesh


_______________________________________________
edk2-devel mailing list
edk2-devel@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel


  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-26  7:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-25  8:43 BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Ramesh R.
2016-08-26  7:24 ` Tian, Feng [this message]
2016-08-30 17:19   ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Ramesh R.
2016-09-01  2:42     ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Tian, Feng
2016-09-01  3:47       ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Jin, Eric
2016-09-02 18:05       ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Ramesh R.
2016-09-05  3:18         ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Tian, Feng
2016-09-05  5:23           ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Jin, Eric
2016-09-08  5:14             ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Ramesh R.
2016-09-08  5:29               ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Jin, Eric
2016-09-08  5:11           ` BootableImageSupportTest\StorageSecurityCommandProtocolTest Ramesh R.

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7F1BAD85ADEA444D97065A60D2E97EE538825C19@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox