For crypto unit tests, it is generally better to use a pseudo-random RNG, with a known (but not constant) seed, so that potential failures can be diagnosed more easily. E.g., the seed could be logged in the test output. On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 at 09:24, Li, Yi1 wrote: > Yes, we can create a host test specific lib if no better ways. > > > > Regards, > > Yi > > > > *From:* Yao, Jiewen > *Sent:* Friday, June 14, 2024 3:20 PM > *To:* Li, Yi1 ; devel@edk2.groups.io > *Cc:* Hou, Wenxing ; Kinney, Michael D < > michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Pedro Falcato ; Ard > Biesheuvel > *Subject:* RE: CryptoPkg host test broken due to smoketest for RDRAND > > > > Can we use a host test specific RngLib? > > > > > > > > *From:* Li, Yi1 > *Sent:* Friday, June 14, 2024 3:08 PM > *To:* devel@edk2.groups.io > *Cc:* Hou, Wenxing ; Yao, Jiewen < > jiewen.yao@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D ; > Pedro Falcato ; Ard Biesheuvel < > ardb+tianocore@kernel.org> > *Subject:* CryptoPkg host test broken due to smoketest for RDRAND > > > > All crypto host tests which consumed randlib broken due to: > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/5714 > > Not sure why this issue not reported by CI when merge this PR. > > > > The reason is that the ```BaseRngLibConstructor``` of rnglib is not called > in host test, so ```mRdRandSupported``` is not enabled. > > Then the Crypto API calls ```GetRandomNumber*``` will fail. > > GetRandomNumber64 ( > > OUT UINT64 *Rand > > ) > > { > > …… > > if (!ArchIsRngSupported ()) { > > return FALSE; > > } > > > > Is there a way to let unit test host to call the constructors correctly? > > > > Regards, > > Yi > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#119570): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/119570 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/106666288/7686176 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-