https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/912650
Does openqa only do qcow2 tests? I'm not seeing raw tests. I'm just curious for another data point. :P
I'm seeing Rawhide and 33 images passing (couple warn, no fail). And on 34 only x86_64 fail, but all of them fail and they're all failing at the firmware as if it's not finding a bootloader at all. Hence wondering if there might be a difference between raw and qcow2...
On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 6:21 PM Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/912650
Does openqa only do qcow2 tests? I'm not seeing raw tests. I'm just curious for another data point. :P
I'm seeing Rawhide and 33 images passing (couple warn, no fail). And on 34 only x86_64 fail, but all of them fail and they're all failing at the firmware as if it's not finding a bootloader at all. Hence wondering if there might be a difference between raw and qcow2...
OK I think it doesn't matter because:
(in case mua munging happens with my paste) https://paste.centos.org/view/49c75eb9
# dd if=Fedora-Cloud-Base-34-20210620.0.x86_64.raw count=1 2>/dev/null | hexdump -C 00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| * 000001c0 02 00 ee ff ff ff 01 00 00 00 ff ff 7f 00 00 00 |................| 000001d0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| * 000001f0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 55 aa |..............U.| 00000200 #
That's clearly wrong... No bootloader in LBA 0. And if I understand correctly, the raw and qcow2 come from the same image. The qcow2 comes from qemu-img convert (raw to qcow2) so that'd explain the openqa failure on the qcow2. Busted!
I don't see a grub2-install command in this log: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/Fedora-Cloud-Base/34/20210620.0...
I'm not sure if it should be in that log with the rest of the anaconda stuff though.
From the rawhide x86_64 cloud base log: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//packages/Fedora-Cloud-Base/Rawhide/20210...
08:19:56,227 WARNING org.fedoraproject.Anaconda.Modules.Storage:INFO:program:Running in chroot '/mnt/sysroot'... grub2-install --no-floppy /dev/vda
So it should be in the 34 log too, right? And yet it's not. So that'd explain why it doesn't have a bootloader. Not sure why it wasn't even executed though, almost like the installation is just missing a bunch of steps?
-- Chris Murphy
197 of these in the non-working instance
08:18:38,802 WARNING org.fedoraproject.Anaconda.Modules.Storage:WARNING:blivet:device/model is not a valid attribute
2 in the working instance. Seems suspicious.
OK so I'm finding that Fedora-Cloud-Base-34-20210620.0.x86_64.raw was created in a UEFI VM, has an ESP and UEFI GRUB. But it's being tested in openqa in a BIOS VM so it fails. But I'm not sure why it's being created in a UEFI VM...
-- Chris Murphy
On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 6:54 PM Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
197 of these in the non-working instance
08:18:38,802 WARNING org.fedoraproject.Anaconda.Modules.Storage:WARNING:blivet:device/model is not a valid attribute
2 in the working instance. Seems suspicious.
OK so I'm finding that Fedora-Cloud-Base-34-20210620.0.x86_64.raw was created in a UEFI VM, has an ESP and UEFI GRUB. But it's being tested in openqa in a BIOS VM so it fails. But I'm not sure why it's being created in a UEFI VM...
https://pagure.io/cloud-sig/issue/331
On Sun, 2021-06-20 at 21:53 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 6:54 PM Chris Murphy lists@colorremedies.com wrote:
197 of these in the non-working instance
08:18:38,802 WARNING org.fedoraproject.Anaconda.Modules.Storage:WARNING:blivet:device/model is not a valid attribute
2 in the working instance. Seems suspicious.
OK so I'm finding that Fedora-Cloud-Base-34-20210620.0.x86_64.raw was created in a UEFI VM, has an ESP and UEFI GRUB. But it's being tested in openqa in a BIOS VM so it fails. But I'm not sure why it's being created in a UEFI VM...
Yeah, we've had that issue for a while but I didn't get the roundtuits to figure out the problem yet. Thanks for figuring it out!