=== a16g_ is now known as ypwong [08:57] infinity, is it just me or are a lot of the kernels seriously overshooting their verification phase? [08:59] apw, smb ^ (or anyone in this timezone that knows what is going on)? [09:00] brendand: I think Brad's been chasing people down to get the last few bugs verified. [09:01] brendand: You can check progress at http://status.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/kernel-bugs/reports/sru-report.html [09:01] infinity, am :) [09:03] brendand, heh no sorry, been on vacation for a couple of days :) [09:04] brendand: I don't think it'll hurt anyone's feelings if you start doing cert testing on them before the bot has flipped the tasks. [09:05] * infinity goes to find a bed. [09:07] arges, yo ... how is the crash testing going ... [12:34] apw: hey, so if I do mkdir a; subvolume create a/b; echo c > a/b/c; rsync -va --one-file-system a b [12:34] apw: then b/b is empty. I.e. a subvolume is treated as a separate filesystem [12:35] apw: is that the expected behavior? [12:35] what the heck is a subvolume [12:35] subvolume [12:35] subvolume: command not found [12:35] i don't even get an offer of one [12:35] apw: make that 'btrfs subvolume' [12:36] i think i would expect a subvolume to be a mount, does it appear as a mount ? [12:36] no [12:36] in /proc/mounts i mean [12:36] it only shows up in 'btrfs subvolume list' [12:38] hallyn_, so rsync figures it out from the stat 'st_dev' field for the file [12:38] hallyn_, so if files in a subvolume have a different st_dev then it will think they are a filesystem [12:41] * henrix -> lunch [12:42] apw: i'm surprised it has a different st_dev. will ahve to think about what to do about that... [12:43] hallyn_, don't subvolumes represent things like snapshots, i would think they would have to have a different st_dev to avoid being the same actual file in rsync's mind === mdeslaur_ is now known as mdeslaur [12:50] apw: yeah they can represent snapshots. but the first one you create (which you can then snapshot) also shows up a different fs. which in one way makes sense, but otoh if it doesn't show up in /proc/mounts i'm not sure how a backup script shoudl know whether to separately rsync /var/lib/lxc/$container/rootfs, which may or may not be a subvolume [12:51] i mean, yeah, i can call out to btrfs subvolume, but if i have to do separate tricks for each fs, that's kind of pathetic [12:51] yeah doesn't make much sense does it [12:52] apw: but anyway, thanks - so that's an answer for lifeless_ at least :) it *is* a different fs, you just have to do it separately [12:52] at least in rsync's mind indeed [12:53] thanks === fmasi_afk is now known as fmasi [14:17] brendand, feel free to start testing i have no reason to believe there will be a respin of any kernels at this point (hopfully i didn't just jinx myself) [14:18] bjf, that's what i was wondering [14:18] bjf, it's not a huge problem if there is - but better to know that it's unlikely [14:19] bjf, i noted though that there is no lucid kernel. have they stopped completely now? [14:19] brendand, no, just no patches this cycle [14:19] bjf, ok [14:19] brendand, though we expect fewer and fewer at this point [14:23] kees, I'm repackaging rng-tools for v4 'cause debian is way behind and the maintainer is unresponsive. You added TPM cruft in 2009. Is it still necessary ? See kernel.ubuntu.com/~rtg/rng-tools-4 for the new source package. [14:29] kamal, mdeslaur: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1208532/comments/9 might be related [14:29] Launchpad bug 1208532 in linux (Ubuntu) "put_page failures with 3.8.0-27.40" [Medium,Incomplete] [14:30] rtg: thanks, I'll take a look [14:49] sbeattie, do you have any interest in reviewing rng-tools at http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~rtg/rng-tools-4 ? [14:50] you touched it once several years ago [14:50] ** [14:50] ** Ubuntu Kernel Team Meeting - Today @ 17:00 UTC - #ubuntu-meeting [14:50] ** === fmasi is now known as fmasi_afk [15:03] jjohansen, rebooting tangerine for kernel update === fmasi_afk is now known as fmasi [15:21] apw, why is kernel promotion getting held up by an eglibc autopackage test ? what is it doing ? [15:25] apw: hey, I think bug #1204005 may be fixed in 3.11 [15:25] Launchpad bug 1204005 in linux (Ubuntu Saucy) "[saucy] kvm host hangs of guest boot with 3.10.0-5" [Critical,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1204005 [15:27] apw: I was able to boot saucy and raring vms, both with vmvga, login to a unity session, launch a browser, etc [15:36] jdstrand, yay thank $deity for that, that was my percieved experience as well [15:36] rtg, i believe it is a functionality test, and all 'depends' packages have their tests run [15:36] rtg, so in this case eglibc needs kernel headers so it is tied to the kernel [15:37] rtg, howerver i think the eglibs tests generally are not very good and run out of space [15:37] apw, wll its pissing me off. IOError: [Errno 28] No space left on device: '/home/ubuntu/adt-log//dsc0-build-xerr' [15:37] rtg, yeah that sucks, so i bring those up on #ubuntu-release and whine [15:37] ship a usb key in your source package :) [15:37] apw, already did, but I think most everyone is at debconf [15:38] ahh no so good, i think jibel is responsible for that puppy [15:44] apw, http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~rtg/rng-tools-4 [15:49] rtg, so i think if the upstream version is '4' this should be versioned as 4-0ub [15:49] rtg, so i think if the upstream version is '4' this should be versioned as 4-0ubuntu1 [15:49] as logically the first debian version would be 4-1 [15:49] apw, I thought about that, but none of Jeff's versions in the past have had a minor number [15:49] 42-unofficial-mt.14-1ubuntu1 [15:50] rtg, that is *-1ubuntu1 [15:50] rng-tools (2-unofficial-mt.14-1) unstable; urgency=low [15:50] was the debian version there [15:50] apw, ok, I'll add the minor number [15:50] rtg, that is *-1ubuntu1 unclear how 4-unoffical-m...1 would sort relative to 4-0u1 [15:51] apw, seems like the other version cruft is just BS [15:52] rtg, and with it there sorting is all a bit of a lottery anyhow [15:57] rtg, but i think 4-0ubuntu1 seems appropriate [15:58] * apw idly wonders who maintains it in debian, as it clearly has not been maintained for some time [16:11] apw, ok, updated the version. I'm inclined to just upload it. [16:12] rtg, yeah the binaries look similar to the previous version [16:12] rtg, there are some very minor lintian errors, nothing to hold you up [16:12] apw, right. the big difference is that I ripped out some TPM cruft from kees. we can always add it back if need be [16:13] apw, I might drop this on the c-k-t PPA first to make sure armhf builds [16:14] rtg, good plan, my amrhf builder isn't booting right now ... grrr [16:14] brendand, seems i might have jinx'd myself .. looking like we may have to respin Q and R (still investigating) [16:14] apw, I don't have an armhf sbuilder right now either [16:15] * apw goes and tries again [16:15] bjf, lol - i don't think we've started testing anyway :) [16:26] brendand, indeed, it looks like i'm respinning. you should have new kernels tomorrow. if we have to delay the start of the next cycle, that's just how it goes. [16:33] rtg: hrm, I added TPM cruft? [16:33] rtg: oh, the rng-tools? hey, don't rip that out, I use it! [16:34] kees, maybe you could get garzik to add it to his upstream repo ? [16:34] it's been semi-abandoned by debian, though. :( [16:34] yeah, I'll ping him [16:35] oh, hm, there's a note about doing this in the kernel... [16:36] hmm 578b016fdc91464c08c096f0c5952cae549fdb8f [16:37] kees, otp, I'll be back i a bit [16:37] went into 3.7, so I guess I'll just switch what I'm doing. [16:38] $ grep HW_RANDOM_TPM /boot/config-3.8.0-27-generic [16:38] CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TPM=m [16:43] kees, just stop being around all these thieves [16:43] ogra_: what? [16:43] then you wont need theft protection ;) [16:43] (isnt that what TPM is ?) [16:43] is that what "tpm" means to you? :P [16:46] kees, so you're OK with me having ripped out your TPM additions ? [16:56] ## [16:56] ## Kernel team meeting in 5 minutes [16:56] ## [17:12] rtg: yup! totally fine. new solution is much nicer. http://www.outflux.net/blog/archives/2013/08/13/tpm-providing-devhwrng/ [17:12] kees: oh, that's nice! [17:13] kees, cool. rnd-tools v4 is now in Saucy === jsalisbury changed the topic of #ubuntu-kernel to: Home: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/ || Ubuntu Kernel Team Meeting - Tues August 20th, 2013 - 17:00 UTC || If you have a question just ask, and do wait around for an answer! [17:16] * rtg -> lunch [17:45] kees: oh, sweet! === fmasi is now known as fmasi_afk === lifeless_ is now known as lifeless [19:53] hallyn_: so this comes back to my question; can we disable the lxc btrfs integration ? [19:55] lifeless: yes, we can. question is only how shoudl we? [19:56] lifeless: i think in the past i required /var/lib/lxc to be its own btrfs mount to do the integration. but i don't think that's compelling. [19:57] lifeless: are you sure you'll never wnat to lxc-clone? is updating the backup scripts more palatable by any chance? [19:58] hallyn_: how about a flag on lxc-create and lxc-clone [19:58] lemme try something [19:58] hallyn_: to disable both lvm and btfs special behaviours [20:00] lifeless: what is the lvm special behavior? [20:00] lifeless: if you do 'lxc-create <...> -B dir', does it then not create a subvolume? (was going to test myself, but my box is busy installing a bunch of fresh containers so i'm stuck on a lock) [20:04] hallyn_: man lxc-clone says When the original container's [20:04] rootfs is an LVM block device or is on a btrfs filesystem, then a snapshotted clone can be created, [20:04] taking up very little initial disk space. [20:09] yes [20:09] but you have to ask for an lvm backed container to get one. it's a separate block device. not really analogous to the btrfs case [20:22] hallyn_: sure [20:22] hallyn_: so I guess I'm saying [20:22] hallyn_: lets make lxc behaviour predictable. Ask for LVM -> Ask for btrfs. [20:27] lifeless: iiii... still prefer to default to a subvolume, but i might be wrong. [20:27] still waiting to be able to test lxc-create -B dir in btrfs [20:28] hallyn_: so -B means I'd need to put in /var/lib/lxc/foo/rootfs for each invocation? I presume you just want to test the code paths ? [20:29] hallyn_: So if btrfs is on by default, I'd be happy if there is an option to turn it off for both create & clone [20:29] lifeless: no, -B would just mean [20:30] lxc-create -t ubuntu -B dir -n x1 [20:30] oh, -B none - gotchya [20:30] blah, dir. I see. [20:30] stopped my script, testing [20:31] stupid shift key, i said debuild -S not -s! [20:34] * rtg -> EOD [21:04] hi [21:04] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1211976 [21:04] Launchpad bug 1211976 in linux (Ubuntu) "[ 11.063330] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 1455 at /build/buildd/linux-3.11.0/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c:8286 check_crtc_state+0x58f/0x9c0 [i915]()" [Undecided,New] === fmasi_afk is now known as fmasi === infinity2 is now known as infinity === fmasi is now known as fmasi_afk