[12:03] $ sudo canonical-livepatch status [12:03] uptime: 598h20m30s [12:03] ^ that's wrong - `uptime` reports 24 days, 22:21 [12:03] And also [12:03] patchState: apply-failed [12:03] Anything I should look at before I lose state by rebooting? [12:04] http://paste.ubuntu.com/p/gNKr4YPdhB/ === himcesjf_ is now known as him-cesjf [13:37] rbasak: uptime seems correct; 24 days x 24 = 576 + 22 hours [13:37] TJ-: oh. Thanks. I saw 598 and didn't pay attention to the units. [13:37] :) [13:38] yeah, at first glance I thought "wow" ! [13:39] I found some logs (on "apply-failed"): https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/F4mYrd45Tc/ [13:41] It's been doing that a while. https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/td7qYQ9SjZ/ is when it seems to have started. [13:42] https://askubuntu.com/q/1152398/7808 is the only Google hit with the same problem - no answer currently. [13:44] Seems too much of a coincidence that both of us had it happen on exactly the same day. [13:47] we've been seeing a lot of reports of livepatch failures in #ubuntu for the last 2 weeks. Originally we thought it was a server connection issue but canonical-sysadmin couldn't see any problems. We asked some users to report bugs but I think they were lazy :) [13:48] * rbasak is writing up a bug [13:52] https://bugs.launchpad.net/canonical-livepatch-client/+bug/1833566 [13:52] Launchpad bug 1833566 in Canonical Live Patch Client "Client stops applying patches with "cannot execute finitModule syscall: required key not available"" [Undecided,Confirmed] [15:10] ben_r: ^ [15:32] * ben_r will take a look at it [15:37] rbasak, I am confused, your text says 4.4.0.151.159, did you mean 151.178? Also, that is not the kernel that was running, you were on 4.4.0-148.174 at the time right? [15:38] ben_r: otp sorry, back in a bit [15:38] np [15:46] ben_r: ah, I see the confusion [15:47] rbasak, np I think I've figured it out. Is this system running with secure boot enabled? [15:53] ben_r: I think so. I have grub-efi-amd64-signed installed. Is there a way to verify? [15:55] rbasak, mokutil --sb-state [15:55] if that is enabled, did you enroll the livepatch key? [15:55] SecureBoot enabled [15:56] ben_r: I believe livepatch has been working correctly for a long time prior to that error [15:56] ben_r: eg: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/xBQBZD7tpd/ [15:56] ben_r: so I think it was all enrolled correctly, yes. [15:56] ben_r: I recall seeing patches applied in previous calls to "status" (in previous boots) [15:57] your text says 4.4.0.151.159> because that's the kernel package currently installed, not the one running [15:59] rbasak, OK, that doesn't do anything to livepatch though. :) you can list the enrolled keys with "mokutil --list-enrolled". If there's a key enrolled you'll see one with the Subject field " Issuer: CN=Canonical Ltd. Live Patch Signing" [15:59] MokListRT is empty [16:00] rbasak, any chance the system's BIOS was updated recently? that can trash keys sometimes [16:01] I have only rebooted once in months, and I believe livepatch was working before the reboot. [16:01] The reboot itself seemed to be completely normal - I didn't enter the BIOS or anything. [16:01] The reason I rebooted was some kind of kernel bug though. [16:03] https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2019/05/24/%23ubuntu-server.html#t18:29 was what happened that caused me to reboot [16:04] I suppose it's possible that fwupd might have done something though perhaps, and the reboot caused a new BIOS fw version to run? [16:04] I don't remember having done that though. [16:04] And on this machine I always update/upgrade manually [16:06] "Earlier I sent SIGSTOP to firefox and snap related process, so I can't run livepatch right now." [16:06] I did that before rebooting. [16:06] Could that have broken livepatch - by it not being able to "shut down" properly? [16:07] Also "canonical-livepatch status" hangs, but I don't know if I caused that by interfering with it earlier. <-- also before my reboot [16:08] rbasak, it's likely that it would have stopped it from doing anything else, but that wouldn't break livepatch. The next time the system boots it would have started normally. [16:10] I think the lack of keys is the problem here, on secure boot the kernel won't let you load anything that isn't signed with a key it recognises. I don't know where your keys went, but there should be at least the one used to boot the system listed === Serge is now known as hallyn