On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Damian Tometzki <damian.tometzki@icloud.com> wrote:
Hello,
Ubuntu 16.04 with current linux-next Kernel workson virtualbox 5.1.28
Host: Windows 10 Guest: Ubuntu 16.04
Best regards Damian
Am Freitag, den 29.09.2017, 08:41 -0400 schrieb valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:08:07 +0530, Pintu Kumar said:
I have a general question. How do we normally verify linux-next tree?
The same exact way you "verify" any other Linux kernel, for whatever definition of "verify" you plan to use.
1) For Oracle virtual box 5.1.26 with ubuntu-32 bit, the linux-next kernel is not booting.
Does an Ubuntu kernel boot correctly under VirtualBox? If not, fix that issue first. Also, "is not booting" isn't detailed enough for anybody to make even a guess as to what's wrong.
Also, note that 5.1.28 is out.
Ok, I just updated to 5.1.28. And my Ubuntu version is already 16.04. Let me try again if it works. Thanks all for your reply. BTW, I am more interested in my another query about QEMU arm. This will be much quicker and easy for me. But the problem is I wanted to use multiple ssh shell on qemu. Also I needed a pre-built rootfs image for qemu-arm, cortex-a9 versatilepb machine. It should have networking and ssh built-in so that I can connect to it using PUTTY client. Note that I could able to build my own minimal busybox and boot qemu using linux-next (non graphical mode). But I could able to get only one shell. I need to test some client/server problem, so I need multiple shell. I am not able to configure net/ssh on this qemu system. So, I have 2 things to ask: 1) If you have pointers on how to setup ssh/net connection on QEMU with busybox, do let me know. 2) Let, please point me to a pre-built qemu-arm busy box image with full features. Thanks, Pintu
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 19:56:41 +0530, Pintu Kumar said:
1) If you have pointers on how to setup ssh/net connection on QEMU with busybox, do let me know.
Busybox doesn't do that as far as I know, as it's intended as a single-user /sbin/init replacement. You'll need a full-featured userspace with an actual init daemon (sysvinit, systemd, etc) and an ssh daemon (openssh, or if you want something smaller, dropbear - works well on embedded things like routers...) And of course things like /bin/login and all the /etc files that needs in order to work...
On 29.09.2017 17:45, valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 19:56:41 +0530, Pintu Kumar said:
1) If you have pointers on how to setup ssh/net connection on QEMU with busybox, do let me know.
Busybox doesn't do that as far as I know, as it's intended as a single-user /sbin/init replacement. You'll need a full-featured userspace with an actual init daemon (sysvinit, systemd, etc) and an ssh daemon (openssh, or if you want [...]
What about /usr/bin/ssh as init replacement ? -- Best regards, Kamil Konieczny Samsung R&D Institute Poland
On Mon, 02 Oct 2017 10:11:34 +0200, Kamil Konieczny said:
What about /usr/bin/ssh as init replacement ?
Well, if you are OK with your system panicking right away. :) (Hint - the init process needs to be something that can run as a daemon). If you use /usr/sbin/sshd, that has a *slightly* better chance of working, except then you will need a *lot* of custom coding in your initramfs to do all the system setup usually done by init during boot - mounting file systems, configuring network interfaces, etc etc etc. Plus, sshd probably doesn't have some of the code needed for a true init process, such as reaping child processes it didn't spawn itself, cleanly shutting down/rebooting, and so on...
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Pintu Kumar <pintu.ping@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 6:44 PM, Damian Tometzki <damian.tometzki@icloud.com> wrote:
Hello,
Ubuntu 16.04 with current linux-next Kernel workson virtualbox 5.1.28
Host: Windows 10 Guest: Ubuntu 16.04
Best regards Damian
Am Freitag, den 29.09.2017, 08:41 -0400 schrieb valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu:
On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:08:07 +0530, Pintu Kumar said:
I have a general question. How do we normally verify linux-next tree?
The same exact way you "verify" any other Linux kernel, for whatever definition of "verify" you plan to use.
1) For Oracle virtual box 5.1.26 with ubuntu-32 bit, the linux-next kernel is not booting.
Does an Ubuntu kernel boot correctly under VirtualBox? If not, fix that issue first. Also, "is not booting" isn't detailed enough for anybody to make even a guess as to what's wrong.
Also, note that 5.1.28 is out.
Ok, I just updated to 5.1.28. And my Ubuntu version is already 16.04. Let me try again if it works. Thanks all for your reply.
Now, with vbox 5.1.28, I am getting below build failure with linux-next. Any quick pointers on this, if anybody faced similar issue. In file included from ./arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:7:0, from ./include/linux/atomic.h:4, from ./include/linux/mm_types_task.h:12, from ./include/linux/mm_types.h:4, from arch/x86/kvm/irq.h:25, from arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:19: arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function ‘__pi_post_block’: ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:129:2: warning: ‘__ret’ is used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized] __ret; \ ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:86:21: note: ‘__ret’ was declared here __typeof__(*(ptr)) __ret; \ ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:133:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__raw_cmpxchg’ __raw_cmpxchg((ptr), (old), (new), (size), LOCK_PREFIX) ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:148:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__cmpxchg’ __cmpxchg(ptr, old, new, sizeof(*(ptr))) ^ arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11732:11: note: in expansion of macro ‘cmpxchg’ } while (cmpxchg(&pi_desc->control, old.control, ^ CC kernel/trace/trace_seq.o CC kernel/trace/trace_stat.o In function ‘__pi_post_block’, inlined from ‘pi_post_block’ at arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11831:2, inlined from ‘vmx_post_block’ at arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11840:2: ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:127:3: error: call to ‘__cmpxchg_wrong_size’ declared with attribute error: Bad argument size for cmpxchg __cmpxchg_wrong_size(); \ ^
BTW, I am more interested in my another query about QEMU arm. This will be much quicker and easy for me. But the problem is I wanted to use multiple ssh shell on qemu. Also I needed a pre-built rootfs image for qemu-arm, cortex-a9 versatilepb machine. It should have networking and ssh built-in so that I can connect to it using PUTTY client. Note that I could able to build my own minimal busybox and boot qemu using linux-next (non graphical mode). But I could able to get only one shell. I need to test some client/server problem, so I need multiple shell. I am not able to configure net/ssh on this qemu system.
So, I have 2 things to ask: 1) If you have pointers on how to setup ssh/net connection on QEMU with busybox, do let me know. 2) Let, please point me to a pre-built qemu-arm busy box image with full features.
Thanks, Pintu
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 07:56:41PM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
BTW, I am more interested in my another query about QEMU arm. This will be much quicker and easy for me. But the problem is I wanted to use multiple ssh shell on qemu. Also I needed a pre-built rootfs image for qemu-arm, cortex-a9 versatilepb machine.
If you want to get more useful help, it might be interesting if you were to specify exactly what kind of "verification" you are interested in doing. What sort of kernel testing are you interested in doing? What part of the kernel are you interested in testing? The fact that you are trying to test both a Ubuntu x86 box as will as a virtual ARM box makes it unclear what part of the kernel you are most intested in testing. In particular, why do you care about accessing the VM via ssh / networking? What sort of testing do you plan to do after manage to get the kernel running? And do you care what distribution you use? I have a huge amount of test automation built for testing kernel file systems. This includes building root_fs images for x86 for use with kvm[1], and arm chroots for use in testing Android systems[2]. There is also a turn-key images for running tests using the Google Cloud Platform[3], and even a Dockerfile[4] so people can run kernel tests using a private Kubernetes cluster. [1] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/kvm-xfstests... [2] https://thunk.org/android-xfstests [3] https://thunk.org/gce-xfstests [4] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kvm-xfstests/Dockerfile If you don't have a file-system centric view of the world, and want to do more generalized kernel testing, the above might not be as interesting to you, although some of the utilities in the xfstests-bld git tree for setting up and building in build chroots, using debootstrap to create root_fs.img files, scripts for manipulating xUnit test result files (the XML format used by Jenkins), using 9p to communicate between the host system running qemu/kvm and the test VM, etc. The point is that if you really want to get serious about kernel testing, you should really think hard about test automation. And in that world, using networking often makes things harder, not easier. For kvm-xfstests we just do our communications using the serial port, which made it easy for us to adapt things for android-xfstests, where we comunicate test runner script via "adb shell". For gce-xfstests things _do_ get a bit more complicated, where the test summary gets e-mail'ed back to the developer, while the full set of test artifacts are archived on Google Cloud Storage. But one of the most powerful things about my setup is vast majority of the test automation code stays the same regardless of whether the kernel being tested is being run in KVM, on a physical Android hardware, or in the Cloud using GCE.
2) Let, please point me to a pre-built qemu-arm busy box image with full features.
Define "full features". Busy box images are generally _not_ full featured. There is a reason why I use a minimal Debian system; a lot of the tests I run require bash, and modern shell utilities, and Python so I can have scripts which manipulate xUnit XML files. Nevertheless, the complete x86 test VM is still only 87 megs, which is still small enough that it doesn't cause me any problems. On the other hand, since I find networking in the test VM to be completely superfluous (and in fact, gets in the way, since a VM which is on the corporate network can be a security problem, and may run afoul of corporate I/T security policies --- and if you don't have those kinds of security policies, you really should....). So my root_fs's general have no networking support whatsoever. It keeps $WORK's secops team *much* happier. :-) - Ted
Thanks Mr. Tso for your reply. Please find my reply inline. On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 07:56:41PM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
BTW, I am more interested in my another query about QEMU arm. This will be much quicker and easy for me. But the problem is I wanted to use multiple ssh shell on qemu. Also I needed a pre-built rootfs image for qemu-arm, cortex-a9 versatilepb machine.
If you want to get more useful help, it might be interesting if you were to specify exactly what kind of "verification" you are interested in doing. What sort of kernel testing are you interested in doing? What part of the kernel are you interested in testing? The fact that you are trying to test both a Ubuntu x86 box as will as a virtual ARM box makes it unclear what part of the kernel you are most intested in testing.
I need to submit a patch to mainline which should be verified against linux-next tree with latest API. My patch is already working with 4.10 LTS version but I need to upgrade.
In particular, why do you care about accessing the VM via ssh / networking? What sort of testing do you plan to do after manage to get the kernel running? And do you care what distribution you use?
My patch is related to some test utility based on client/server model. So, I need 2 terminal, one for server and one for client. No, I really don't care about distribution, whichever works this way is good for me. So I a trying both ways: Ububntu(x86) or qemu (arm). The point is, I should be able to test my patch with linux-next.
I have a huge amount of test automation built for testing kernel file systems. This includes building root_fs images for x86 for use with kvm[1], and arm chroots for use in testing Android systems[2]. There is also a turn-key images for running tests using the Google Cloud Platform[3], and even a Dockerfile[4] so people can run kernel tests using a private Kubernetes cluster.
[1] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/kvm-xfstests... [2] https://thunk.org/android-xfstests [3] https://thunk.org/gce-xfstests [4] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kvm-xfstests/Dockerfile
If you don't have a file-system centric view of the world, and want to do more generalized kernel testing, the above might not be as interesting to you, although some of the utilities in the xfstests-bld git tree for setting up and building in build chroots, using debootstrap to create root_fs.img files, scripts for manipulating xUnit test result files (the XML format used by Jenkins), using 9p to communicate between the host system running qemu/kvm and the test VM, etc.
The point is that if you really want to get serious about kernel testing, you should really think hard about test automation. And in that world, using networking often makes things harder, not easier. For kvm-xfstests we just do our communications using the serial port, which made it easy for us to adapt things for android-xfstests, where we comunicate test runner script via "adb shell". For gce-xfstests things _do_ get a bit more complicated, where the test summary gets e-mail'ed back to the developer, while the full set of test artifacts are archived on Google Cloud Storage. But one of the most powerful things about my setup is vast majority of the test automation code stays the same regardless of whether the kernel being tested is being run in KVM, on a physical Android hardware, or in the Cloud using GCE.
2) Let, please point me to a pre-built qemu-arm busy box image with full features.
Define "full features". Busy box images are generally _not_ full featured. There is a reason why I use a minimal Debian system; a lot of the tests I run require bash, and modern shell utilities, and Python so I can have scripts which manipulate xUnit XML files. Nevertheless, the complete x86 test VM is still only 87 megs, which is still small enough that it doesn't cause me any problems.
Qemu Busybox -> full feature for me means: I should be able to connect Qemu with my PUTTY session, and open 2 terminal. Moreover, I should be able to do scp to my qemu machine from my ubuntu pc.
On the other hand, since I find networking in the test VM to be completely superfluous (and in fact, gets in the way, since a VM which is on the corporate network can be a security problem, and may run afoul of corporate I/T security policies --- and if you don't have those kinds of security policies, you really should....). So my root_fs's general have no networking support whatsoever. It keeps $WORK's secops team *much* happier. :-)
I am really sorry for the confusion. Ok, lets talk one by one. 1) How to resolve linux-next build error with ubuntu virtual box 5.1.28 Any quick pointers on this will really help me to quickly verify my patch and submit. In file included from ./arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h:7:0, from ./include/linux/atomic.h:4, from ./include/linux/mm_types_task.h:12, from ./include/linux/mm_types.h:4, from arch/x86/kvm/irq.h:25, from arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:19: arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c: In function ‘__pi_post_block’: ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:129:2: warning: ‘__ret’ is used uninitialized in this function [-Wuninitialized] __ret; \ ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:86:21: note: ‘__ret’ was declared here __typeof__(*(ptr)) __ret; \ ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:133:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__raw_cmpxchg’ __raw_cmpxchg((ptr), (old), (new), (size), LOCK_PREFIX) ^ ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:148:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__cmpxchg’ __cmpxchg(ptr, old, new, sizeof(*(ptr))) ^ arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11732:11: note: in expansion of macro ‘cmpxchg’ } while (cmpxchg(&pi_desc->control, old.control, ^ CC kernel/trace/trace_seq.o CC kernel/trace/trace_stat.o In function ‘__pi_post_block’, inlined from ‘pi_post_block’ at arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11831:2, inlined from ‘vmx_post_block’ at arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:11840:2: ./arch/x86/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:127:3: error: call to ‘__cmpxchg_wrong_size’ declared with attribute error: Bad argument size for cmpxchg __cmpxchg_wrong_size(); \
- Ted
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 09:28:09AM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
I need to submit a patch to mainline which should be verified against linux-next tree with latest API.
If you want to verify a patch that you intend to submit upstream, my suggestion is to *not* use linux-next, but rather use the latest tagged -rc from Linus's tree. So for example, you might want to use v4.14-rc2 as your base, and then apply your patch on top of v4.14-rc2. And then test v4.14-rc2. That way you don't need to worry about debugging problems that might be caused by code in other people's development trees. If you know which subsystem tree your commit is going to be sent to, you might use as your base the current development branch of that subsystem tree. But in general, it's fine to use something like v4.14-rc2; if the subsystem maintainer you plan to be submitting your patch has other preference, he or she will let you know, or take care of rebasing your patch onto his subsystme tree.
My patch is related to some test utility based on client/server model. So, I need 2 terminal, one for server and one for client.
That implies you're running the commands to run the test by hand. In the ideal world, tests should be automated, even those that are using client/server so that tests can be run unattended, over and over again. For example, here's an example of test involving a client and a server in xfstests: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/tests/generic/13... See? No terminal required, and certainly not two terminals! Remember, it's important not just to run one test, because the risk is that fixing one bug might cause a test regression somewhere else. So when I "validate" a kernel, I'm running thousands of tests, just to test the ext4 file system. For each bug that we fix, we try to add a new automated test, so we can be sure that some future change doesn't cause a bug to reappear. And if you're running hundreds or thousands of tests, you certainly aren't going to be wanting to manually set up each test by using putty to login to the VM using ssh!
1) How to resolve linux-next build error with ubuntu virtual box 5.1.28
Virtual box is not relevant. What is relevant is the kernel config file you are using, and what compiler version / distro are you using to build the kernel. And as I said, you're better off using something like v4.14-rc2 instead of linux-next. - Ted
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 09:28:09AM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
I need to submit a patch to mainline which should be verified against linux-next tree with latest API.
If you want to verify a patch that you intend to submit upstream, my suggestion is to *not* use linux-next, but rather use the latest tagged -rc from Linus's tree. So for example, you might want to use v4.14-rc2 as your base, and then apply your patch on top of v4.14-rc2. And then test v4.14-rc2. That way you don't need to worry about debugging problems that might be caused by code in other people's development trees.
If you know which subsystem tree your commit is going to be sent to, you might use as your base the current development branch of that subsystem tree. But in general, it's fine to use something like v4.14-rc2; if the subsystem maintainer you plan to be submitting your patch has other preference, he or she will let you know, or take care of rebasing your patch onto his subsystme tree.
My patch is related to some test utility based on client/server model. So, I need 2 terminal, one for server and one for client.
That implies you're running the commands to run the test by hand. In the ideal world, tests should be automated, even those that are using client/server so that tests can be run unattended, over and over again.
For example, here's an example of test involving a client and a server in xfstests:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/tests/generic/13...
See? No terminal required, and certainly not two terminals!
Remember, it's important not just to run one test, because the risk is that fixing one bug might cause a test regression somewhere else. So when I "validate" a kernel, I'm running thousands of tests, just to test the ext4 file system. For each bug that we fix, we try to add a new automated test, so we can be sure that some future change doesn't cause a bug to reappear. And if you're running hundreds or thousands of tests, you certainly aren't going to be wanting to manually set up each test by using putty to login to the VM using ssh!
1) How to resolve linux-next build error with ubuntu virtual box 5.1.28
Virtual box is not relevant. What is relevant is the kernel config file you are using, and what compiler version / distro are you using to build the kernel. And as I said, you're better off using something like v4.14-rc2 instead of linux-next.
Ok thank you so much for your reply. Now I am able to boot with v4.14-rc2. But now I am facing another problem. Now, I am not able to connect to internet from virtual box. When I switch back to the default 4.10 the internet works normally. I think the dlclient stopped working. I am getting continuous logs related to apparmor like this: apparmor="DENIED" comm=dhclient apparmor="DENIED" comm=cups-browsed With 4.10, I tried installing apparmor-utils and then reboot with 4.14-rc2, but it did not help. Any suggestions on this?
- Ted
Am Sonntag, den 01.10.2017, 21:58 +0530 schrieb Pintu Kumar:
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 09:28:09AM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
I need to submit a patch to mainline which should be verified against linux-next tree with latest API.
If you want to verify a patch that you intend to submit upstream, my suggestion is to *not* use linux-next, but rather use the latest tagged -rc from Linus's tree. So for example, you might want to use v4.14-rc2 as your base, and then apply your patch on top of v4.14- rc2. And then test v4.14-rc2. That way you don't need to worry about debugging problems that might be caused by code in other people's development trees.
If you know which subsystem tree your commit is going to be sent to, you might use as your base the current development branch of that subsystem tree. But in general, it's fine to use something like v4.14-rc2; if the subsystem maintainer you plan to be submitting your patch has other preference, he or she will let you know, or take care of rebasing your patch onto his subsystme tree.
My patch is related to some test utility based on client/server model. So, I need 2 terminal, one for server and one for client.
That implies you're running the commands to run the test by hand. In the ideal world, tests should be automated, even those that are using client/server so that tests can be run unattended, over and over again.
For example, here's an example of test involving a client and a server in xfstests:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/tests/g eneric/131
See? No terminal required, and certainly not two terminals!
Remember, it's important not just to run one test, because the risk is that fixing one bug might cause a test regression somewhere else. So when I "validate" a kernel, I'm running thousands of tests, just to test the ext4 file system. For each bug that we fix, we try to add a new automated test, so we can be sure that some future change doesn't cause a bug to reappear. And if you're running hundreds or thousands of tests, you certainly aren't going to be wanting to manually set up each test by using putty to login to the VM using ssh!
1) How to resolve linux-next build error with ubuntu virtual box 5.1.28
Virtual box is not relevant. What is relevant is the kernel config file you are using, and what compiler version / distro are you using to build the kernel. And as I said, you're better off using something like v4.14-rc2 instead of linux-next.
Ok thank you so much for your reply. Now I am able to boot with v4.14-rc2. But now I am facing another problem. Now, I am not able to connect to internet from virtual box. When I switch back to the default 4.10 the internet works normally. I think the dlclient stopped working. I am getting continuous logs related to apparmor like this: apparmor="DENIED" comm=dhclient apparmor="DENIED" comm=cups-browsed
With 4.10, I tried installing apparmor-utils and then reboot with 4.14-rc2, but it did not help. Any suggestions on this?
Hello, i resolved the issue with: sudo /etc/init.d/apparmor stop Damian
- Ted
On 10/01/17 09:44, Damian Tometzki wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 01.10.2017, 21:58 +0530 schrieb Pintu Kumar:
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 09:28:09AM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
I need to submit a patch to mainline which should be verified against linux-next tree with latest API.
If you want to verify a patch that you intend to submit upstream, my suggestion is to *not* use linux-next, but rather use the latest tagged -rc from Linus's tree. So for example, you might want to use v4.14-rc2 as your base, and then apply your patch on top of v4.14- rc2. And then test v4.14-rc2. That way you don't need to worry about debugging problems that might be caused by code in other people's development trees.
If you know which subsystem tree your commit is going to be sent to, you might use as your base the current development branch of that subsystem tree. But in general, it's fine to use something like v4.14-rc2; if the subsystem maintainer you plan to be submitting your patch has other preference, he or she will let you know, or take care of rebasing your patch onto his subsystme tree.
My patch is related to some test utility based on client/server model. So, I need 2 terminal, one for server and one for client.
That implies you're running the commands to run the test by hand. In the ideal world, tests should be automated, even those that are using client/server so that tests can be run unattended, over and over again.
For example, here's an example of test involving a client and a server in xfstests:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/tests/g eneric/131
See? No terminal required, and certainly not two terminals!
Remember, it's important not just to run one test, because the risk is that fixing one bug might cause a test regression somewhere else. So when I "validate" a kernel, I'm running thousands of tests, just to test the ext4 file system. For each bug that we fix, we try to add a new automated test, so we can be sure that some future change doesn't cause a bug to reappear. And if you're running hundreds or thousands of tests, you certainly aren't going to be wanting to manually set up each test by using putty to login to the VM using ssh!
1) How to resolve linux-next build error with ubuntu virtual box 5.1.28
Virtual box is not relevant. What is relevant is the kernel config file you are using, and what compiler version / distro are you using to build the kernel. And as I said, you're better off using something like v4.14-rc2 instead of linux-next.
Ok thank you so much for your reply. Now I am able to boot with v4.14-rc2. But now I am facing another problem. Now, I am not able to connect to internet from virtual box. When I switch back to the default 4.10 the internet works normally. I think the dlclient stopped working. I am getting continuous logs related to apparmor like this: apparmor="DENIED" comm=dhclient apparmor="DENIED" comm=cups-browsed
With 4.10, I tried installing apparmor-utils and then reboot with 4.14-rc2, but it did not help. Any suggestions on this?
Hello,
i resolved the issue with: sudo /etc/init.d/apparmor stop
or boot with: apparmor=0 -- ~Randy
On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 09:58:37PM +0530, Pintu Kumar wrote:
Ok thank you so much for your reply. Now I am able to boot with v4.14-rc2. But now I am facing another problem. Now, I am not able to connect to internet from virtual box. When I switch back to the default 4.10 the internet works normally. I think the dlclient stopped working. I am getting continuous logs related to apparmor like this: apparmor="DENIED" comm=dhclient apparmor="DENIED" comm=cups-browsed
How about compiling the kernel without apparmor? Here are some very minimal kernel configs that are designed to work with qemu and Google Compute Engine (if you use the 64-bit configs): https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/tree/master/kernel-configs Grab the latest 4.9 kernel configs (e.g., [1]); it will work with 4.14-rc2, copy it into your kernel build tree as .config, and then run "make olddefconfig". That's why I use with qemu (32-bit and 64-bit) and Google Compute Engine using a minimal debian chroot, and it works Just Fine. [1] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kernel-configs/x86_64-conf... If you want an example of how to build a automatically generated test appliance image (which is repeatably built, and can be used as part of a discplined release engineering process), please see: https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/kvm-xfstests/test-applianc... Cheers, - Ted P.S. And here is an example of how a completely automated kernel testing report might look like. I ran a single command, and a few hours later, the following lands in my e-mail's inbox. Note the lack of using putty to manually configure a single test, and not a single terminal was opened during the entire test run. :-) TESTRUNID: ltm-20171001045435 KERNEL: kernel 4.14.0-rc2-ext4-00005-gcdfa281a30f5 #513 SMP Sun Oct 1 00:52:09 EDT 2017 x86_64 CMDLINE: --kernel gs://gce-xfstests/bzImage full CPUS: 2 MEM: 7680 ext4/4k 337 tests, 23 skipped, 6 errors, 10569 seconds generic/233 generic/361 generic/388 generic/451 generic/456 generic/459 ext4/1k 337 tests, 35 skipped, 8 errors, 12440 seconds generic/018 generic/232 generic/273 generic/361 generic/388 generic/451 generic/456 generic/459 ext4/ext3 336 tests, 73 skipped, 6 errors, 10639 seconds generic/232 generic/361 generic/382 generic/388 generic/451 generic/459 ext4/encrypt 327 tests, 97 skipped, 8 errors, 6785 seconds ext4/022 ext4/028 generic/081 generic/361 generic/382 generic/388 generic/459 shared/298 ext4/nojournal 334 tests, 60 skipped, 6 errors, 6107 seconds ext4/301 generic/113 generic/232 generic/441 generic/451 generic/459 ext4/ext3conv 336 tests, 23 skipped, 4 errors, 10039 seconds generic/361 generic/388 generic/451 generic/459 ext4/adv 335 tests, 28 skipped, 8 errors, 8732 seconds generic/232 generic/233 generic/361 generic/388 generic/399 generic/451 generic/456 generic/459 ext4/dioread_nolock 336 tests, 23 skipped, 5 errors, 7434 seconds generic/081 generic/233 generic/388 generic/451 generic/459 ext4/data_journal 336 tests, 33 skipped, 5 errors, 13027 seconds generic/361 generic/371 generic/388 generic/441 generic/459 ext4/bigalloc_1k 317 tests, 44 skipped, 10 errors, 8506 seconds generic/204 generic/235 generic/269 generic/273 generic/361 generic/388 generic/422 generic/451 generic/456 generic/459 FSTESTIMG: gce-xfstests/xfstests-201709302211 FSTESTPRJ: gce-xfstests FSTESTVER: e2fsprogs v1.43.6-85-g7595699d0 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 22:04:14 -0400) FSTESTVER: fio fio-2.21 (Thu, 15 Jun 2017 12:25:03 -0600) FSTESTVER: quota 16f31b1 (Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:53:11 +0200) FSTESTVER: stress-ng 977ae35 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 23:45:03 -0400) FSTESTVER: xfsprogs v4.12.0 (Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:57:14 -0500) FSTESTVER: xfstests-bld 0d85f98 (Sat, 30 Sep 2017 21:42:59 -0400) FSTESTVER: xfstests linux-v3.8-1693-ga71d59bc (Fri, 29 Sep 2017 23:56:42 -0400) FSTESTSET: -g auto FSTESTOPT: aex
participants (7)
-
Damian Tometzki -
Kamil Konieczny -
Mike Galbraith -
Pintu Kumar -
Randy Dunlap -
Theodore Ts'o -
valdis.kletnieks＠vt.edu