[05:08] morning [05:50] mborzecki, zyga-mbp: hi! [05:51] good morning, happy Friday and apparently, happy first day of pretty cold mornings :E [05:51] I was just outside and I can smell the cold again [05:53] mardy: zyga-mbp hey [05:53] yeah, it is cold in the morning [05:54] not really amused about that :/ [05:55] mborzecki yeah, sucky year [06:03] morning [06:05] 'morning pstolowski [06:05] finally someone not complaining about the cold! Must be pretty warm in there ;-) [06:05] good morning pstolowski :) [06:06] pstolowski: hey [06:08] another nested test is broken? https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/QYyCqMMQD3/ [06:10] hmm looking at the test, afaiu it's not possible to for it to pass at this point [06:18] btw, it's still not clear to me the difference between nested tests and normal tests [06:23] mardy: in nested tests we create a VM and control it from the test, do checks with nested_exec (which executes ssh -c ... against that vm) [06:24] mardy: we use that for tests that wouldn't be possible the normal way; nested have a separate test suite as they need different setup and more powerful hosts to run VM inside [06:32] mardy in the nested case the system allocated by spread runs another system inside, with a lot more control over what that looks like exactly [06:32] mardy importantly nested lets you play with TPMs [06:32] nowadays perhaps more, I'm out of touch [06:34] yeah we use them to also test things like seeding a new image and booting it, or simulating usb device plugging/unplugging for hotplug [06:34] s/seeding/preseeding/ [06:40] a trivial fix in https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10727 [06:40] PR #10727: tests/nested/core/extra-snaps-assertions: fix the match pattern [06:42] PR snapd#10727 opened: tests/nested/core/extra-snaps-assertions: fix the match pattern [07:06] where do we update base declaration for new interfaces? a snap using the new snap-refresh-control interface is rejected by the store [07:07] pstolowski: can you request manual rview? [07:07] pstolowski: otherwise I think ian can help (I think I can also in theory but I'm a bit reluctant) [07:07] mvo: not for this rejection it seems [07:10] pstolowski: what is the snap called? [07:10] test-snapd-refresh-control ? [07:10] mvo: yes [07:11] amurray: is the reject " [07:11] interface 'snap-refresh-control' not found in base declaration declaration-snap-v2_plug_known (snap-refresh-control, snap-refresh-control) [07:11] " and " [07:11] unknown interface 'snap-refresh-control' lint-snap-v2_plugs (snap-refresh-control, snap-refresh-control) [07:11] " something you can help pstolowski with ? for the test-snapd-refresh-control snap? [07:12] amurray: it's for the new interface we landed in snapd recently. https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10702 [07:12] PR #10702: interfaces: introduce snap-refresh-control interface [07:14] (it's an interface with no actual permissions, so wasn't tagged for you to review) [07:16] mvo: hi, can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10722 ? [07:16] PR #10722: tests/nested/manual/refresh-revert-fundamentals: fix variable use [07:42] mvo pstolowski: hey, yep sure I can help - review-tools needs to be updated to know about this interface... I've just manually approved it for now [07:43] hey amurray :) [07:43] hey zyga-mbp :) [07:48] amurray: awesome, thank you! [07:49] thanks amurray ! [07:57] mvo: do you know the PR# that reverted time sync change? [07:58] mv [07:58] mvo: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10661 ? [07:58] PR #10661: cmd/libsnap-confine-private: device cgroup v2 support [07:58] it's probab a bit more complex than the usual stuff, but it'd be great to have another review form our team before amurray does a pass [07:59] also it's better if more people are even remotely familiar with this stuff, you know, bus factor and all [07:59] mborzecki I'll have a look as well [07:59] but please allow for one day over weekend [08:00] so that I really read and look at the details [08:00] it's not something I can promise today [08:00] mborzecki: I was looking at that a bit earlier today :) - sorry I haven't had time yet to really dig into it - I want to give it a decent look to make sure I understand the BPF filter etc too [08:00] hopefully early/mid next week though I should get to it proper [08:02] amurray: that's great, let me know if you have any questions or would like to discuss the PR [08:04] mvo pstolowski: I have granted the snap declaration for use of snap-refresh-control to test-snapd-refresh-control - and once https://code.launchpad.net/~alexmurray/review-tools/+git/review-tools/+merge/408065 lands and review-tools on the store is updated then it should pass review automatically [08:05] * amurray is reminded again how getting some CI setup to warn on missing snapd interfaces in review-tools would be very useful... [08:06] amurray: thank you! [08:11] pstolowski: should snap-refresh-control be auto-connected as well for test-snapd-refresh-control? [08:17] amurray: no, it's fine as is [08:21] ok no worries [08:23] mvo: can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10727 ? [08:23] PR #10727: tests/nested/core/extra-snaps-assertions: fix the match pattern [08:29] mborzecki: sure, let me do that [08:32] PR snapd#10727 closed: tests/nested/core/extra-snaps-assertions: fix the match pattern [08:48] https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10725 is now ready for review and should pass with the updated test-snap-refresh-control snaps in the store [08:48] PR #10725: o/hookstate: require snap-refresh-control interface for snapctl refresh --proceed [08:53] PR snapd#10728 opened: ifacestate: undo repository connection if doConnect fails [08:54] mvo: do you know the PR# that reverted time sync change? [09:01] pstolowski: #110 iirc [09:01] PR #110: introduce AccountKey, support decoding it and validation [09:18] pstolowski: https://github.com/snapcore/core20/pull/110 to be precise [09:18] PR core20#110: hooks: revert PR#105 - it seems to [10:13] hm wonder why `mknod /dev/fb0 c 29 0` sometimes fails with EPERM [10:24] mborzecki sometimes? [10:24] is that in CI? [10:24] zyga-mbp: yeah [10:24] hmm, that's weird [10:24] does sleep 5 help? [10:29] I wonder if you are racing with something like udev [10:38] zyga-mbp: it's mknod, so the error may come from devtmpfs, but why? it's not like it's checking for actual device support, I can mknod /dev/nvidiactl with the right major:minor and it does not error even though i don't have nvidia card [10:38] hmm [10:38] I'd look at the source at this stage [10:41] zyga-mbp: i'll probably will, but remodel first, our code for generating tasks for remodel is real hairy :/ [10:41] * zyga-mbp hugs mborzecki [10:41] better put off the yak shaving for spring [11:48] PR snapd#10729 opened: codecov: fix files pathnames [12:16] here's a super-easy one to review ^ :-) [13:23] mardy approved [13:34] mardy: fyi there's a 'skip spread' label that you can add to a PR so that spread tests will not be executed [13:35] miguelpires: ^^ also :) [13:47] thanks :) [14:05] mborzecki: ah, right, but I guess it's too late now [14:29] PR snapd#10726 closed: systemd: add mock systemd helper [14:29] PR snapd#10729 closed: codecov: fix files pathnames [15:54] PR snapd#10730 opened: strutil: add Intersection() [15:59] PR snapd#10731 opened: sysconfig/cloudinit: add cloudDatasourcesInUseForDir [16:19] PR snapd#10732 opened: tests/lib/nested.sh: split out additional helper for adding files to VM imgs [16:28] PR core20#112 closed: doc: add instructions on enabling bootcharts [16:37] good morning, I'm new to Ubuntu Core, wondering how I can check if Full Disk Encryption is enabled? I ran: snap model --verbose and the grade came back as "signed". My understanding is that "signed" means Encrypted (if its on supported hardware) and unencrypted otherwise. How can I confirm whether the device has 'hardware support'? [16:38] Or even better would be a command to show the FDE status? [16:57] LedHed: one easy way to check if you have a shell on the device is to do `ls /dev/disk/by-partlabel/ | grep enc` if that shows you some files then your device is encrypted successfully [16:57] but yeah we really have been meaning to add some command to check this easily but haven't done it quite yet [17:20] ijohnson[m], thanks that worked. Or at lease I think it did, no files returned so safe to assume no encryption. [17:21] Is there a way to enable encryption for unsupported hardware? maybe by creating a custom image or hardware assertion? [17:22] The hardware appears to have everything necessary to be supported, Secure Boot, and TPM [18:39] PR snapd#10670 closed: tests: new snapd-state tool [19:24] PR snapd#10580 closed: interface/builtin: add qualcomm-ipc-router interface for AF_QIPCRTR socket protocol [19:24] PR snapd#10723 closed: o/ifacestate: special-case system-files and force refreshing its static attributes [19:29] PR snapd#10721 closed: interface/builtin: add qualcomm-ipc-router interface for AF_QIPCRTR socket protocol (2.52) [19:29] PR snapd#10733 opened: interface/builtin: add qualcomm-ipc-router interface for AF_QIPCRTR socket protocol (2.52) [19:52] hey cachio (or cachio_ ) have you seen this before ? https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/GMpz86YFFp/ [19:53] ijohnson[m], yes, I think maciej fixed it [19:53] or this one: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/FCtxpq8Xbd/ ? [19:54] cachio: nice [19:54] there was a pr for that [19:54] I think the second one has something to do with not stopping fakedevicesvc in some other test [19:54] it should be on master [19:54] hmm, I saw it here on master: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10732 [19:54] PR #10732: tests/lib/nested.sh: split out additional helper for adding files to VM imgs [20:55] PR snapd#10733 closed: interface/builtin: add qualcomm-ipc-router interface for AF_QIPCRTR socket protocol (2.52) [21:10] PR snapd#10734 opened: release: 2.52 [23:15] PR snapd#10734 closed: release: 2.52