This is identical to the existing
firmware-auto-efi-loader-path-nonstandard test case, but uses
a standard firmware path.
Right now the two test cases behave identically, but that's
going to change in the future.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
This unifies the naming between the manual and automatic
selection cases, clarifies the contents of the tests and makes
room for more tests being added in the future.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Most of the differences, such as those in the domain name or
amount of memory, are fairly harmless, but they still make it
more cumbersome than necessary to directly compare different
input (and output) files.
More importantly, the use of unversioned machine types in some
of the test cases results in the descriptor-based autoselection
logic being effectively skipped, because the compatible machine
types as listed in them are only the versioned variants.
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
Generally speaking, when firmware autoselection is in use we
don't want any information to be provided manually. There are
two exceptions:
* we still want the path to the NVRAM file to be customizable;
* using <loader secure='yes'/> was how you would ask for a
firmware that implements the Secure Boot feature in the
original approach to firmware autoselection, so we want to
keep that working.
Anything else should result in a descriptive error.
Resolves: https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt/-/issues/327
Signed-off-by: Andrea Bolognani <abologna@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@redhat.com>
