Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
Are we looking for any other reviews on this?
Thanks,
Jeff
From: Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 8:05 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Jeff Brasen ; Laszlo Ersek
Cc: eric@intel.com; G Edhaya Chandran ; Samer
El-Haj-Mahmoud
Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
Jeff,
Thanks for the patch. I will send a patch to move the Maintainers.txt one level
up for consistency with other TianoCore repos.
Reviewed-By Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud
mailto:samer.el-haj-mahm...@arm.com>>
From: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>> On Behalf Of Jeff Brasen
via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 11:56 AM
To: Laszlo Ersek mailto:ler...@redhat.com>>;
devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
Cc: eric@intel.com<mailto:eric@intel.com>; G Edhaya Chandran
mailto:edhaya.chand...@arm.com>>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
Didn't see it at first as it was not at the top of edk2-test but under
uefi-sct. CC'd maintainers
Thanks,
Jeff
From: Laszlo Ersek mailto:ler...@redhat.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 2:59 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>>; Jeff Brasen
mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
On 09/23/20 00:13, Jeff Brasen wrote:
> Any comments on this change?
I suggest CC'ing the maintainers responsible for reviewing this change.
(I don't know who they are, unfortunately -- is there a Maintainers.txt
file in the uefi-sct tree?)
Thanks
Laszlo
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> From: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 11:23 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
> mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>>
> Cc: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> Subject: [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection
> enabled.
>
> On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
> function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
> data prior to modification.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> ---
> .../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> .../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
>
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
> ---
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> +++
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
> --*/
>
>
>
>
>
> -#include "SctLib.h"
> +#include "SctLib.h"
>
> #include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> //
>
> // Backup current test data
>
> //
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
>
> CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
>
>
> //
>
> // For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
>
> //
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[In
Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
Jeff,
Thanks for the patch. I will send a patch to move the Maintainers.txt one level
up for consistency with other TianoCore repos.
Reviewed-By Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud
From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Jeff Brasen via
groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 11:56 AM
To: Laszlo Ersek ; devel@edk2.groups.io
Cc: eric@intel.com; G Edhaya Chandran
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
Didn't see it at first as it was not at the top of edk2-test but under
uefi-sct. CC'd maintainers
Thanks,
Jeff
From: Laszlo Ersek mailto:ler...@redhat.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 2:59 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>>; Jeff Brasen
mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
On 09/23/20 00:13, Jeff Brasen wrote:
> Any comments on this change?
I suggest CC'ing the maintainers responsible for reviewing this change.
(I don't know who they are, unfortunately -- is there a Maintainers.txt
file in the uefi-sct tree?)
Thanks
Laszlo
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> From: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 11:23 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io<mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>
> mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>>
> Cc: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> Subject: [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection
> enabled.
>
> On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
> function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
> data prior to modification.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen mailto:jbra...@nvidia.com>>
> ---
> .../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> .../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
>
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
> ---
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> +++
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
> --*/
>
>
>
>
>
> -#include "SctLib.h"
> +#include "SctLib.h"
>
> #include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> //
>
> // Backup current test data
>
> //
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
>
> CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
>
>
> //
>
> // For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
>
> //
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[Index]
>
> + TestDataRw
>
> );
>
>
>
>
>
> -CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +
Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
Didn't see it at first as it was not at the top of edk2-test but under
uefi-sct. CC'd maintainers
Thanks,
Jeff
From: Laszlo Ersek
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2020 2:59 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io ; Jeff Brasen
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory
protection enabled.
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
On 09/23/20 00:13, Jeff Brasen wrote:
> Any comments on this change?
I suggest CC'ing the maintainers responsible for reviewing this change.
(I don't know who they are, unfortunately -- is there a Maintainers.txt
file in the uefi-sct tree?)
Thanks
Laszlo
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> From: Jeff Brasen
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 11:23 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: Jeff Brasen
> Subject: [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection
> enabled.
>
> On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
> function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
> data prior to modification.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen
> ---
> .../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> .../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
>
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
> ---
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> +++
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
> --*/
>
>
>
>
>
> -#include "SctLib.h"
> +#include "SctLib.h"
>
> #include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> //
>
> // Backup current test data
>
> //
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
>
> CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
>
>
> //
>
> // For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
>
> //
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[Index]
>
> + TestDataRw
>
> );
>
>
>
>
>
> -CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -413,7 +415,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[Index]
>
> + TestDataRw
>
> );
>
>};
>
>
>
> @@ -458,6 +460,7 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
On 09/23/20 00:13, Jeff Brasen wrote:
> Any comments on this change?
I suggest CC'ing the maintainers responsible for reviewing this change.
(I don't know who they are, unfortunately -- is there a Maintainers.txt
file in the uefi-sct tree?)
Thanks
Laszlo
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> From: Jeff Brasen
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 11:23 AM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: Jeff Brasen
> Subject: [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection
> enabled.
>
> On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
> function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
> data prior to modification.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen
> ---
> .../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> .../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
>
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
> ---
> a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> +++
> b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
> --*/
>
>
>
>
>
> -#include "SctLib.h"
> +#include "SctLib.h"
>
> #include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> //
>
> // Backup current test data
>
> //
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
>
> CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
>
>
> //
>
> // For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
>
> //
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[Index]
>
> + TestDataRw
>
> );
>
>
>
>
>
> -CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -413,7 +415,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
> TestDataSav,
>
> - TestData[Index]
>
> + TestDataRw
>
> );
>
>};
>
>
>
> @@ -458,6 +460,7 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
> };
>
>
>
>CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
> + CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> @@ -490,13 +493,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
> // Backup current test data
>
> //
>
> CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
>
> +CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
>
>
>
> //
>
> // For each test data, test the StrUpr functionality.
>
> //
>
> -UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
>
> +UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
>
>
>
> -if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
>
> +if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
>
> } else {
>
>AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
>
> @@ -511,14 +515,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
> __FILE__,
>
> (UINTN)__LINE__,
>
>
Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
Any comments on this change?
Thanks,
Jeff
From: Jeff Brasen
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2020 11:23 AM
To: devel@edk2.groups.io
Cc: Jeff Brasen
Subject: [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
data prior to modification.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen
---
.../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
.../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
diff --git
a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
---
a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
+++
b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
--*/
-#include "SctLib.h"
+#include "SctLib.h"
#include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
@@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
};
CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
+ CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
@@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
//
// Backup current test data
//
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
//
// For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
//
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
-CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -413,7 +415,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
};
@@ -458,6 +460,7 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
};
CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
+ CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
@@ -490,13 +493,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
// Backup current test data
//
CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
//
// For each test data, test the StrUpr functionality.
//
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -511,14 +515,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
-CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
[edk2-devel] [PATCH] uefi-sct/SctPkg: Correct issue with memory protection enabled.
On systems with memory protection enabled the modification of local
function initialization data results in permission issue. Make a copy of
data prior to modification.
Signed-off-by: Jeff Brasen
---
.../UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
.../UnicodeCollation2BBTestFunction.c | 38 ++-
2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
diff --git
a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
index 6fa11e6c..e0b4c1d9 100644
---
a/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
+++
b/uefi-sct/SctPkg/TestCase/UEFI/EFI/Protocol/UnicodeCollation/BlackBoxTest/UnicodeCollationBBTestFunction.c
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Abstract:
--*/
-#include "SctLib.h"
+#include "SctLib.h"
#include "UnicodeCollationBBTestMain.h"
@@ -337,6 +337,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
};
CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
+ CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
@@ -368,14 +369,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
//
// Backup current test data
//
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
//
// For each test data, test the StrLwr functionality.
//
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrLwr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -390,15 +392,15 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
-CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -413,7 +415,7 @@ BBTestStrLwrFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
};
@@ -458,6 +460,7 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
};
CHAR16 TestDataSav[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
+ CHAR16 TestDataRw[MAX_SIZE_OF_STRING + 1];
@@ -490,13 +493,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
// Backup current test data
//
CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataRw, TestData[Index]);
//
// For each test data, test the StrUpr functionality.
//
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrUpr (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -511,14 +515,14 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+ TestDataRw
);
-CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
-UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestData[Index]);
+CopyUnicodeString (TestDataSav, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrLwr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
+UnicodeCollation->StrUpr (UnicodeCollation, TestDataRw);
-if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestData[Index])) {
+if (CheckStrEql (TestDataSav, TestDataRw)) {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_PASSED;
} else {
AssertionType = EFI_TEST_ASSERTION_FAILED;
@@ -533,7 +537,7 @@ BBTestStrUprFunctionAutoTest (
__FILE__,
(UINTN)__LINE__,
TestDataSav,
- TestData[Index]
+
