Failed "SignerTest" is causing entire Rambi family builds to fail |
|||||||||||||
Issue descriptionAll Rambi family boards are failing their build due to failed signertest. Trend seems to have started late on 2017-05-09: https://cros-goldeneye.corp.google.com/chromeos/console/listBuild?boards=banjo%2Ccandy%2Ccandy-freon%2Cclapper%2Cclapper-freon%2Ccranky%2Cenguarde%2Cenguarde-freon%2Cexpresso%2Cexpresso-freon%2Cglimmer%2Cglimmer-freon%2Cgnawty%2Cgnawty-freon%2Cheli%2Ckip%2Ckip-freon%2Cninja%2Corco%2Cparry%2Cquawks%2Cquawks-freon%2Crambi%2Crambi-freon%2Csquawks%2Csquawks-freon%2Csumo%2Cswanky%2Cswanky-freon%2Cwinky%2Cwinky-freon&milestone=59&chromeOsVersion=&chromeVersion=&startTimeFrom=&startTimeTo=#/ Here are a couple log files: https://uberchromegw.corp.google.com/i/chromeos_release/builders/clapper-release%20release-R59-9460.B/builds/32/steps/SignerTest/logs/stdio https://uberchromegw.corp.google.com/i/chromeos_release/builders/banjo-release%20release-R59-9460.B/builds/32/steps/SignerTest/logs/stdio Seems like the error is: ERROR security_test_image: secure_kernelparams: test failed
,
May 17 2017
+semenzato Do you know who might be able to help with this? INFO security_test_image: Running ensure_secure_kernelparams.sh Unexpected kernel parameters found: maxcpus=3 Debug output: required_kparams=( 'cros_secure' 'dm_verity.error_behavior=3' 'dm_verity.max_bios=-1' 'dm_verity.dev_wait=1' 'init=/sbin/init' 'ro' 'rootwait' 'add_efi_memmap' 'boot=local' 'i915.modeset=1' 'nmi_watchdog=panic,lapic' 'noresume' 'noswap' 'tpm_tis.force=1' 'tpm_tis.interrupts=0' )
,
May 23 2017
ping! any update on this ?
,
May 23 2017
The failure on rambi is owrst on M59, appear to be mostly pass in M60 https://cros-goldeneye.corp.google.com/chromeos/console/listBuild?boards=banjo%2Ccandy%2Ccandy-freon%2Cclapper%2Cclapper-freon%2Ccranky%2Cenguarde%2Cenguarde-freon%2Cexpresso%2Cexpresso-freon%2Cglimmer%2Cglimmer-freon%2Cgnawty%2Cgnawty-freon%2Cheli%2Ckip%2Ckip-freon%2Cninja%2Corco%2Cparry%2Cquawks%2Cquawks-freon%2Crambi%2Crambi-freon%2Csquawks%2Csquawks-freon%2Csumo%2Cswanky%2Cswanky-freon%2Cwinky%2Cwinky-freon&milestone=&chromeOsVersion=&chromeVersion=&startTimeFrom=&startTimeTo=#%2F
,
May 23 2017
,
May 24 2017
,
May 24 2017
Ninja: Unexpected kernel parameters found: maxcpus=2 Clapper: Unexpected kernel parameters found: maxcpus=3
,
May 24 2017
First, I'm surprised anyone is specifying maxcpus...but I'm assuming there is some good reason for doing so since several public overlays are doing this:
grundler@firesword ~/trunk/src/overlays $ fgrep -R maxcpus
overlay-heli/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-candy/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-banjo/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-gnawty/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-kip/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-squawks/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-clapper/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
grep: .git/shallow: No such file or directory
grep: .git/packed-refs: No such file or directory
overlay-enguarde/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-glimmer/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-quawks/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-sumo/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=2" >> "$1"
overlay-winky/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-rambi/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-expresso/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-swanky/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-orco/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=3" >> "$1"
overlay-ninja/scripts/build_kernel_image.sh: echo "maxcpus=2" >> "$1"
grep: overlay-variant-veyron-mickey/chromeos-base/chromeos-bsp-mickey/chromeos-bsp-mickey-0.0.1-r2.ebuild: No such file or directory
ninja added the maxcpus with this change as a workaround:
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/484652/
I'm going to guess most of the above are running chromeos-4.4 kernel and suffering some common issue... which suggests ensure_secure_kernelparams.sh needs to be modified to accept this parameter. Any objections?
,
May 24 2017
Agreed, this should already be fixed by https://chrome-internal-review.googlesource.com/#/c/360789/ Perhaps this just needs to be merged into 59?
,
May 24 2017
This bug requires manual review: We are only 12 days from stable. Please contact the milestone owner if you have questions. Owners: amineer@(Android), cmasso@(iOS), gkihumba@(ChromeOS), Abdul Syed@(Desktop) For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
,
May 24 2017
c#9: yes, merging to M59 should do the trick. Bernie, did you want to do that yourself?
,
May 31 2017
,
May 31 2017
,
Jun 1 2017
,
Jun 16 2017
,
Jan 22 2018
|
|||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||
Comment 1 by vsu...@chromium.org
, May 17 2017