* dann frazier <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> [2021-03-18 16:30]:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:25 PM Ryan Harper <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> 
> wrote:
> >
> > * dann frazier <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> [2021-03-18 12:11]:
> > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:25 AM Ryan Harper <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > * dann frazier <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> [2021-03-17 20:30]:
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:05 AM Ryan Harper 
> > > > > <1918...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Dan,
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) flash-kernel could get installed post-divert. In that case,
> > > > > flash-kernel's own postinst will cause it to run and then fail. This
> > > > > happens today if you start with a cloud image w/o flash-kernel
> > > > > pre-baked because Ubuntu's kernel recommends flash-kernel, causing it
> > > > > to be installed along with the kernel. Official cloud images happen to
> > > >
> > > > Hrm, so if we take a squashfs rootfs (with no flash-kernel present)
> > > > chroot into it and install the linux-image-generic package pulling in
> > > > flash-kernel this fails due to postinst of flash-kernel expecting
> > > > initramfs to already be generated?  This doesn't seem like a curtin bug.
> > >
> > > If done so in a chroot that exposes the kernel interfaces (/proc &
> > > /sys) that claim to be hardware that requires the initramfs to be
> > > post-processed, yes.
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing something but if I install linux-image-generic
> > it populates /boot with vmlinuz-$version (and a few more things)
> > and /lib/modules/$version  and the kernels postinst will invoke
> > update-initramfs.  The /boot/initrd.img-$version is *generated* at
> > that time during the kernel's postinstall
> >
> > Now, in the arm case IIUC, the kernel package has a dep on flash-kernel
> > being present as it's "needed" to generate the initramfs ... so how can
> > flash-kernel's postinst *fail* if it is the tool that's generating said
> > initramfs file?
> 
> What flash-kernel does is generate wrapped versions of *exisiting*
> vmlinuz and initrd.img files. It doesn't generate those files, rather
> post-processes them.
> The kernel doesn't depend on flash-kernel, it just recommends it like
> it does GRUB on x86.

Yes, I get that but it still looks like a packaging bug if dpkg installs
flash-kernel first and /boot is not populated with existing initrds; one
could easily see this happen in a debootstrap.

Is the "liveness" of the chroot what's tripping up flash-kernel?  We
currently run inside a chroot which mounts /dev /proc /run and /sys; we
could drop those but it also seems reasonable to have flash-kernel not
expect existing initrds?

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Kernel
Packages, which is subscribed to linux in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1918427

Title:
  curtin: install flash-kernel in arm64 UEFI unexpected

Status in cloud-images:
  Confirmed
Status in curtin package in Ubuntu:
  Confirmed
Status in linux package in Ubuntu:
  In Progress

Bug description:
  I used APM Mustang which flash-kernel supported in u-boot mode.
  But I used it with UEFI environment.
  It will cause fatal error when I used ARM64 ubuntu live server ISO to install 
system.

  In code[1], this will not install `flash-kernel` for APM Mustang because of 
UEFI.
  So that means code[2] will not disable `flash-kernel` in target system, only 
disable `update-initramfs`.

  When curtin execute to `install_kernel` stage, code[3,4] will not install 
`flash-kernel` either.
  But in code[5], it will install `linux-generic`.
  `linux-generic` has a long dependency tree and it will get `flash-kernel` in 
Recommended field.
  Apt by default will install Recommended package before kernel is installed.[6]
  So it will still execute `zz-flash-kernel` and `flash-kernel` when installing 
kernel.
  But system didn't create any `initrd.img` ever because curtin disable 
`update-initramfs` in code[2].
  This will cause that `flash-kernel` cannot find `initrd.img.<kvers>` and fail 
when installing it.

  This issue didn't effect all ARM64 UEFI platform because `flash-kernel` 
didn't support them and skip.[7]
  I'm not sure which is best solution for this.
  But I think we should apply PR-27 in `flash-kernel`[8] for enhancement and 
fix curtin process with this patch both.

  If we only apply PR-27, it should work fine as well because it will be 
skipped when detecting UEFI
  and install `flash-kernel` before `disable_update_initranfs` in ARM platform 
without UEFI.[9]

  [Patch-1,2,3] might have side effect.
  Picking one patch for curtin should be enough.
  But I need your advice for this to determine which one is better for curtin.
  There are two categories
  1. avoid installing flash-kernel if no need, [Patch1,2]
  2. always install flash-kernel in arm/arm64 and make sure it be installed 
before code[2] [Patch3]
  (I will attach patch in reply.)

  Thanks a lot
  Regards,
  Date

  [1] 
https://github.com/canonical/curtin/blob/master/curtin/deps/__init__.py#L57-L58
  [2] 
https://github.com/canonical/curtin/blob/master/curtin/commands/curthooks.py#L1693-L1699
  [3] 
https://github.com/canonical/curtin/blob/master/curtin/commands/curthooks.py#L365-L370
  [4] 
https://github.com/canonical/curtin/blob/master/curtin/commands/curthooks.py#L311-L327
  [5] 
https://github.com/canonical/curtin/blob/master/curtin/commands/curthooks.py#L372-L374
  [6] https://github.com/Debian/apt/blob/master/apt-pkg/init.cc#L132
  [7] 
https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/flash-kernel/-/blob/master/functions#L787
  [8] https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/flash-kernel/-/merge_requests/27
  [9] curtin will insert `flash-kernel` into `REQUIRED_EXECUTABLES` when system 
is arm/arm64 without UEFI.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-images/+bug/1918427/+subscriptions

-- 
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
Post to     : kernel-packages@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kernel-packages
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Reply via email to