** Description changed: [Impact] - * An explanation of the effects of the bug on users and + Jammy's MariaDB was built with io_uring support, and it tries to enable + it at runtime if it deems it's running on a supported kernel. There is a + range of kernel versions it checks, but of interest for this SRU, the + Focal (5.4.x) kernel is inside this range and io_uring will be enabled. + The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there. - * justification for backporting the fix to the stable release. + Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running + a jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the launchpad + builders). - * In addition, it is helpful, but not required, to include an - explanation of how the upload fixes this bug. + If io_uring is enabled, a higher MEMLOCK limit is required than what is + set by default in focal or jammy (64Mb is what we get, 256Mb or more is + required). + + The systemd unit file for mariadb tries to raise this limit, but in an + unprivileged container, or a root-less chroot, this won't work. + + MariaDB has checks in place to catch when MEMLOCK is too low, in which + case it will not use io_uring, but these checks are failing because of + the LTO build flags that were used in the jammy build of mariadb. It's + unclear if it's a bug in gcc. There is more information in comment #1, + comment #5 and later. + + The suggested fix here is to disable LTO for the jammy build. This has + been done for kinetic already, and is also applied to the debian + packaging (inside a distro-specific conditional). + [Test Plan] - * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug + * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug - * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected - package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes - the problem. + * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected + package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes + the problem. - * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, - this should also be described here. + * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, + this should also be described here. [Where problems could occur] - * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is - wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? + * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is + wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? - * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before - upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important - to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the - event of a regression. + * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before + upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important + to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the + event of a regression. - * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why - your upload is low risk. + * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why + your upload is low risk. - * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, - and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. + * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, + and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [Other Info] - - * Anything else you think is useful to include - * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board - * and address these questions in advance + * Anything else you think is useful to include + * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board + * and address these questions in advance [Original Description] <rbasak> ahasenack: IIRC, originally Launchpad was FTBFSing on mariadb that included io_uring support because upstream were doing a build time test for io_uring (and I think still are), which is wrong because it should be done at runtime since the lack of io_uring availablity at build time doesn't tell us about its availablity at runtime. <rbasak> But then the Launchpad builders got updated to a newer release and therefore a newer kernel that supported it. <rbasak> AIUI, that's how we ended up with a successful build in the Jammy release pocket (of 10.6). <ahasenack> I think the lp builders are using the focal hwe kernel <ahasenack> 5.4.0-something <ahasenack> let me check that build log <rbasak> But then something changed that caused this current FTBFS, and I haven't tracked down what that is. <ahasenack> hm, both are 10.6.7 <ahasenack> release and proposed <rbasak> What puzzles me is that if the root cause is a memlock rlimit issue then why did it work before? <rbasak> So since there's a contradiction somewhere, maybe one or more of my "facts" above is wrong. <ahasenack> this is the current failure <ahasenack> 2022-04-14 8:11:49 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) <ahasenack> and ulimit -l confirms that the limit is lower <ahasenack> Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes <ahasenack> just 64kbytes <rbasak> Yeah but then how did the release pocket build work? <ahasenack> either the limit was different back then <ahasenack> or ... stuff
** Description changed: [Impact] + + Jammy's MariaDB will fail to build, and also fail to start, if the + underlying kernel is 5.4.x (focal's) and if it's running in an + unprivileged container (lxd, docker). It will also fail to build in + launchpad builders. + + Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running + an unprivileged jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the + launchpad builders). Jammy's MariaDB was built with io_uring support, and it tries to enable it at runtime if it deems it's running on a supported kernel. There is a range of kernel versions it checks, but of interest for this SRU, the Focal (5.4.x) kernel is inside this range and io_uring will be enabled. - The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there. - - Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running - a jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the launchpad - builders). + The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there, + and thus the bug is not manifested in that case. If io_uring is enabled, a higher MEMLOCK limit is required than what is set by default in focal or jammy (64Mb is what we get, 256Mb or more is required). The systemd unit file for mariadb tries to raise this limit, but in an - unprivileged container, or a root-less chroot, this won't work. + unprivileged container this won't work. MariaDB has checks in place to catch when MEMLOCK is too low, in which case it will not use io_uring, but these checks are failing because of the LTO build flags that were used in the jammy build of mariadb. It's - unclear if it's a bug in gcc. There is more information in comment #1, - comment #5 and later. + unclear if it's a bug in gcc or something else. There is more + information in comment #1, comment #5 and later. The suggested fix here is to disable LTO for the jammy build. This has been done for kinetic already, and is also applied to the debian packaging (inside a distro-specific conditional). - [Test Plan] * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes the problem. * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, this should also be described here. [Where problems could occur] * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the event of a regression. * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why your upload is low risk. * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [Other Info] * Anything else you think is useful to include * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board * and address these questions in advance [Original Description] <rbasak> ahasenack: IIRC, originally Launchpad was FTBFSing on mariadb that included io_uring support because upstream were doing a build time test for io_uring (and I think still are), which is wrong because it should be done at runtime since the lack of io_uring availablity at build time doesn't tell us about its availablity at runtime. <rbasak> But then the Launchpad builders got updated to a newer release and therefore a newer kernel that supported it. <rbasak> AIUI, that's how we ended up with a successful build in the Jammy release pocket (of 10.6). <ahasenack> I think the lp builders are using the focal hwe kernel <ahasenack> 5.4.0-something <ahasenack> let me check that build log <rbasak> But then something changed that caused this current FTBFS, and I haven't tracked down what that is. <ahasenack> hm, both are 10.6.7 <ahasenack> release and proposed <rbasak> What puzzles me is that if the root cause is a memlock rlimit issue then why did it work before? <rbasak> So since there's a contradiction somewhere, maybe one or more of my "facts" above is wrong. <ahasenack> this is the current failure <ahasenack> 2022-04-14 8:11:49 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) <ahasenack> and ulimit -l confirms that the limit is lower <ahasenack> Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes <ahasenack> just 64kbytes <rbasak> Yeah but then how did the release pocket build work? <ahasenack> either the limit was different back then <ahasenack> or ... stuff ** Description changed: [Impact] Jammy's MariaDB will fail to build, and also fail to start, if the underlying kernel is 5.4.x (focal's) and if it's running in an unprivileged container (lxd, docker). It will also fail to build in launchpad builders. Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running an unprivileged jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the launchpad builders). Jammy's MariaDB was built with io_uring support, and it tries to enable it at runtime if it deems it's running on a supported kernel. There is a range of kernel versions it checks, but of interest for this SRU, the Focal (5.4.x) kernel is inside this range and io_uring will be enabled. The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there, and thus the bug is not manifested in that case. If io_uring is enabled, a higher MEMLOCK limit is required than what is set by default in focal or jammy (64Mb is what we get, 256Mb or more is required). The systemd unit file for mariadb tries to raise this limit, but in an unprivileged container this won't work. MariaDB has checks in place to catch when MEMLOCK is too low, in which case it will not use io_uring, but these checks are failing because of the LTO build flags that were used in the jammy build of mariadb. It's unclear if it's a bug in gcc or something else. There is more information in comment #1, comment #5 and later. The suggested fix here is to disable LTO for the jammy build. This has been done for kinetic already, and is also applied to the debian packaging (inside a distro-specific conditional). [Test Plan] + The test plan is to launch mariadb in a jammy lxd container running on a focal host. - * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug + lxc launch ubuntu:focal f --vm + lxc shell + lxd init # just hit enter for all questions + lxc launch ubuntu:jammy j + lxc shell j + ulimit -l # confirm it's less than 256 + apt update && apt install mariadb-server -y - * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected - package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes - the problem. - * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update, - this should also be described here. + After the installation, mariadb will not be running, and this can be checked with: + + systemctl status mariadb-server + + or + + journal -u mariadb.server + + You will see something like this: + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb systemd[1]: Starting MariaDB 10.6.7 database server... + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] /usr/sbin/mariadbd (server 10.6.7-MariaDB-2ubuntu1) starting as process 1864 ... + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: The first data file './ibdata1' did not exist. A new tablespace will be created! + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Compressed tables use zlib 1.2.11 + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using transactional memory + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Number of pools: 1 + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using crc32 + pclmulqdq instructions + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) + Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 220617 18:32:01 [ERROR] mysqld got signal 6 ; + + + And a crash dump. + + With the fixed version, the service will be running normally after + installation. [Where problems could occur] * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the event of a regression. * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why your upload is low risk. * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [Other Info] * Anything else you think is useful to include * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board * and address these questions in advance [Original Description] <rbasak> ahasenack: IIRC, originally Launchpad was FTBFSing on mariadb that included io_uring support because upstream were doing a build time test for io_uring (and I think still are), which is wrong because it should be done at runtime since the lack of io_uring availablity at build time doesn't tell us about its availablity at runtime. <rbasak> But then the Launchpad builders got updated to a newer release and therefore a newer kernel that supported it. <rbasak> AIUI, that's how we ended up with a successful build in the Jammy release pocket (of 10.6). <ahasenack> I think the lp builders are using the focal hwe kernel <ahasenack> 5.4.0-something <ahasenack> let me check that build log <rbasak> But then something changed that caused this current FTBFS, and I haven't tracked down what that is. <ahasenack> hm, both are 10.6.7 <ahasenack> release and proposed <rbasak> What puzzles me is that if the root cause is a memlock rlimit issue then why did it work before? <rbasak> So since there's a contradiction somewhere, maybe one or more of my "facts" above is wrong. <ahasenack> this is the current failure <ahasenack> 2022-04-14 8:11:49 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) <ahasenack> and ulimit -l confirms that the limit is lower <ahasenack> Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes <ahasenack> just 64kbytes <rbasak> Yeah but then how did the release pocket build work? <ahasenack> either the limit was different back then <ahasenack> or ... stuff ** Description changed: [Impact] Jammy's MariaDB will fail to build, and also fail to start, if the underlying kernel is 5.4.x (focal's) and if it's running in an unprivileged container (lxd, docker). It will also fail to build in launchpad builders. Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running an unprivileged jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the launchpad builders). Jammy's MariaDB was built with io_uring support, and it tries to enable it at runtime if it deems it's running on a supported kernel. There is a range of kernel versions it checks, but of interest for this SRU, the Focal (5.4.x) kernel is inside this range and io_uring will be enabled. The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there, and thus the bug is not manifested in that case. If io_uring is enabled, a higher MEMLOCK limit is required than what is set by default in focal or jammy (64Mb is what we get, 256Mb or more is required). The systemd unit file for mariadb tries to raise this limit, but in an unprivileged container this won't work. MariaDB has checks in place to catch when MEMLOCK is too low, in which case it will not use io_uring, but these checks are failing because of the LTO build flags that were used in the jammy build of mariadb. It's unclear if it's a bug in gcc or something else. There is more information in comment #1, comment #5 and later. The suggested fix here is to disable LTO for the jammy build. This has been done for kinetic already, and is also applied to the debian packaging (inside a distro-specific conditional). [Test Plan] The test plan is to launch mariadb in a jammy lxd container running on a focal host. lxc launch ubuntu:focal f --vm - lxc shell + lxc shell lxd init # just hit enter for all questions lxc launch ubuntu:jammy j lxc shell j ulimit -l # confirm it's less than 256 apt update && apt install mariadb-server -y - - After the installation, mariadb will not be running, and this can be checked with: + After the installation, mariadb will not be running, and this can be + checked with: systemctl status mariadb-server or - journal -u mariadb.server + journalctl -u mariadb.server You will see something like this: Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb systemd[1]: Starting MariaDB 10.6.7 database server... Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] /usr/sbin/mariadbd (server 10.6.7-MariaDB-2ubuntu1) starting as process 1864 ... Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: The first data file './ibdata1' did not exist. A new tablespace will be created! Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Compressed tables use zlib 1.2.11 Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using transactional memory Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Number of pools: 1 Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using crc32 + pclmulqdq instructions Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 220617 18:32:01 [ERROR] mysqld got signal 6 ; - And a crash dump. With the fixed version, the service will be running normally after installation. [Where problems could occur] * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the event of a regression. * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why your upload is low risk. * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [Other Info] * Anything else you think is useful to include * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board * and address these questions in advance [Original Description] <rbasak> ahasenack: IIRC, originally Launchpad was FTBFSing on mariadb that included io_uring support because upstream were doing a build time test for io_uring (and I think still are), which is wrong because it should be done at runtime since the lack of io_uring availablity at build time doesn't tell us about its availablity at runtime. <rbasak> But then the Launchpad builders got updated to a newer release and therefore a newer kernel that supported it. <rbasak> AIUI, that's how we ended up with a successful build in the Jammy release pocket (of 10.6). <ahasenack> I think the lp builders are using the focal hwe kernel <ahasenack> 5.4.0-something <ahasenack> let me check that build log <rbasak> But then something changed that caused this current FTBFS, and I haven't tracked down what that is. <ahasenack> hm, both are 10.6.7 <ahasenack> release and proposed <rbasak> What puzzles me is that if the root cause is a memlock rlimit issue then why did it work before? <rbasak> So since there's a contradiction somewhere, maybe one or more of my "facts" above is wrong. <ahasenack> this is the current failure <ahasenack> 2022-04-14 8:11:49 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) <ahasenack> and ulimit -l confirms that the limit is lower <ahasenack> Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes <ahasenack> just 64kbytes <rbasak> Yeah but then how did the release pocket build work? <ahasenack> either the limit was different back then <ahasenack> or ... stuff -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to systemd in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1970634 Title: FTBFS: mariadb fails to start due to low MEMLOCK limit Status in mariadb-10.6 package in Ubuntu: Fix Released Status in systemd package in Ubuntu: Confirmed Status in mariadb-10.6 source package in Jammy: Triaged Status in systemd source package in Jammy: In Progress Bug description: [Impact] Jammy's MariaDB will fail to build, and also fail to start, if the underlying kernel is 5.4.x (focal's) and if it's running in an unprivileged container (lxd, docker). It will also fail to build in launchpad builders. Common scenarios where this combination exists is a focal host, running an unprivileged jammy container (lxd or docker), or even a chroot (the launchpad builders). Jammy's MariaDB was built with io_uring support, and it tries to enable it at runtime if it deems it's running on a supported kernel. There is a range of kernel versions it checks, but of interest for this SRU, the Focal (5.4.x) kernel is inside this range and io_uring will be enabled. The jammy kernel (5.15) is not, so io_uring will not be enabled there, and thus the bug is not manifested in that case. If io_uring is enabled, a higher MEMLOCK limit is required than what is set by default in focal or jammy (64Mb is what we get, 256Mb or more is required). The systemd unit file for mariadb tries to raise this limit, but in an unprivileged container this won't work. MariaDB has checks in place to catch when MEMLOCK is too low, in which case it will not use io_uring, but these checks are failing because of the LTO build flags that were used in the jammy build of mariadb. It's unclear if it's a bug in gcc or something else. There is more information in comment #1, comment #5 and later. The suggested fix here is to disable LTO for the jammy build. This has been done for kinetic already, and is also applied to the debian packaging (inside a distro-specific conditional). [Test Plan] The test plan is to launch mariadb in a jammy lxd container running on a focal host. lxc launch ubuntu:focal f --vm lxc shell lxd init # just hit enter for all questions lxc launch ubuntu:jammy j lxc shell j ulimit -l # confirm it's less than 256 apt update && apt install mariadb-server -y After the installation, mariadb will not be running, and this can be checked with: systemctl status mariadb-server or journalctl -u mariadb.server You will see something like this: Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb systemd[1]: Starting MariaDB 10.6.7 database server... Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] /usr/sbin/mariadbd (server 10.6.7-MariaDB-2ubuntu1) starting as process 1864 ... Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: The first data file './ibdata1' did not exist. A new tablespace will be created! Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Compressed tables use zlib 1.2.11 Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using transactional memory Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Number of pools: 1 Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Note] InnoDB: Using crc32 + pclmulqdq instructions Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 2022-06-17 18:32:01 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) Jun 17 18:32:01 jammy-mariadb mariadbd[1864]: 220617 18:32:01 [ERROR] mysqld got signal 6 ; And a crash dump. With the fixed version, the service will be running normally after installation. [Where problems could occur] * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up? * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the event of a regression. * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why your upload is low risk. * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered, and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU. [Other Info] * Anything else you think is useful to include * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and the Technical Board * and address these questions in advance [Original Description] <rbasak> ahasenack: IIRC, originally Launchpad was FTBFSing on mariadb that included io_uring support because upstream were doing a build time test for io_uring (and I think still are), which is wrong because it should be done at runtime since the lack of io_uring availablity at build time doesn't tell us about its availablity at runtime. <rbasak> But then the Launchpad builders got updated to a newer release and therefore a newer kernel that supported it. <rbasak> AIUI, that's how we ended up with a successful build in the Jammy release pocket (of 10.6). <ahasenack> I think the lp builders are using the focal hwe kernel <ahasenack> 5.4.0-something <ahasenack> let me check that build log <rbasak> But then something changed that caused this current FTBFS, and I haven't tracked down what that is. <ahasenack> hm, both are 10.6.7 <ahasenack> release and proposed <rbasak> What puzzles me is that if the root cause is a memlock rlimit issue then why did it work before? <rbasak> So since there's a contradiction somewhere, maybe one or more of my "facts" above is wrong. <ahasenack> this is the current failure <ahasenack> 2022-04-14 8:11:49 0 [Warning] mariadbd: io_uring_queue_init() failed with ENOMEM: try larger memory locked limit, ulimit -l, or https://mariadb.com/kb/en/systemd/#configuring-limitmemlock under systemd (262144 bytes required) <ahasenack> and ulimit -l confirms that the limit is lower <ahasenack> Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes <ahasenack> just 64kbytes <rbasak> Yeah but then how did the release pocket build work? <ahasenack> either the limit was different back then <ahasenack> or ... stuff To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mariadb-10.6/+bug/1970634/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
