Re: [lfs-support] Page Table Isolation
On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 10:13:16PM +, Ken Moffat wrote: [ Correcting my erroneous comment on the skylake firmware, although it's so embarrassing that I was strongly tempted not to bother. ] > > > > Intel are also in the process of releasing new firmware for > > processors released in the last 5 years. The current firmware is > > now 20171117 but I'm not sure if that is up to date (it might be!) > > > > https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27337/Linux-Processor-Microcode-Data-File?v=t > > > > Well, whatever else that does, it does NOT contain anything new for > my SandyBridge (I didn't really expect any update, it is more than 5 > years old), but also nothing new for my Haswell, which I had thought > might get an update. > > There _is_ a different file for my Skylake, but it doesn't load > (trying late loading, dmesg reported soemthing like 'unable to > save', and using it for early loading did not load, and it was a > PITA to get the earlier firmware loaded (early loading didn't > happen, but I've now extracted it again to /lib/firmware and managed > late loading). > I've just updated the Skylake to 4.14.12. Embarrassingly, I discovered my grub entries for this system didn't specify any initrd (for firmware). Using the debian firmware, which includes fixes for one of the Spectre vulnerabilities (and where there was an update for my Haswell), I'm again on 0xba from April. And although the new intel firmware had a different md5sum, after again altering grub.cfg and rebooting, it is still 0xba. Summary - apart from my local errors, for the moment most intel CPUs do NOT have new firmware to mitigate Spectre. Still no idea why late loading on the "new" firmware failed. ĸen -- Truth, in front of her huge walk-in wardrobe, selected black leather boots with stiletto heels for such a barefaced truth. - Unseen Academicals -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] [blfs-support] Page Table Isolation
Hazel Russman wrote: On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 17:37:32 + Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:30:15PM +, Hazel Russman wrote: I have just built a 4.14.11 kernel with PTI and I can't boot it. I get a string of acpi errors and then a panic. As far as I can see, it's the same problem as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1520265. That was cured by a bios update but I wouldn't date to do a thing like that. Looks like I am stuck with 4.12.8 for the time being. The processor is pretty old, an Intel Core2 Duo. Maybe it's too old to be affected by Meltdown. I would value any advice. From what I was reading on lkml last night, all the issues reported against 4.15-rc from fedora have now been fixed in Linus's tree, but I do not know if those fixes have yet reached the stable 4.14 tree. So my first suggestion is to try 4.14.12. Like you, I'm very wary of bios updates (I've bricked enough hardware over the years). 4.14.12 has the same problem. However I was able to boot it successfully by using the command line parameter "acpi=off". I have no idea what not having acpi will do to my system! I'm attaching the end of the earlier kernel panic messages (painstakingly transcribed by hand) in case someone finds it informative. The odd thing is that a diff of the configuration files for 4.12.8 (the native LFS-8.1 kernel) and 4.14.12 does not show anything new that's relevant to acpi. There must be some difference in the code itself. I just did a full build of the latest (updated today) build of LFS (nothing from BLFS). I used a 4.14.12 kernel. When I build a new kernel, I generally copy my most recent config to the linux tree as .config and run 'make oldconfig'. New menu items are presented. One thing I noted was a new option: PAGE_TABLE_ISOLATION I selected yes for that. The system came up with no problem. Comparing dmesg on the same system with a 4.13.11 kernel, the newer system added swap at 9.753897 and the older one at 8.819398 so it seems it took about a second longer to finish booting. The boot scripts were about a second slower also. I did not need the acpi=off kernel option. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] Page Table Isolation
> > Ext3 can be run as a reduced-functionality ext4 by simply mounting the > > partition as ext4 in /etc/fstab. Although I often use HD-tray adapters so I can easily replace a box's HD without opening the case, when needed, I have always made it a point to use the most common FS on all systems. That way if some system/partition in a box develops a problem I can boot any other system in the box and fix it. ext4 is not fully backward compatible, and offers no necessary new functionality AFAICS. When I need to do a repair, I do not want to have to deal with compatibility issues also. Had that once with inode sizes, and didn't need the delay! -- Paul Rogers paulgrog...@fastmail.fm Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] [blfs-support] Page Table Isolation
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 17:37:32 + Ken Moffat wrote: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:30:15PM +, Hazel Russman wrote: > > > > I have just built a 4.14.11 kernel with PTI and I can't boot it. I get a > > string of acpi errors and then a panic. As far as I can see, it's the same > > problem as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1520265. That was > > cured by a bios update but I wouldn't date to do a thing like that. > > > > Looks like I am stuck with 4.12.8 for the time being. The processor is > > pretty old, an Intel Core2 Duo. Maybe it's too old to be affected by > > Meltdown. I would value any advice. > > From what I was reading on lkml last night, all the issues reported > against 4.15-rc from fedora have now been fixed in Linus's tree, but > I do not know if those fixes have yet reached the stable 4.14 tree. > > So my first suggestion is to try 4.14.12. Like you, I'm very wary > of bios updates (I've bricked enough hardware over the years). > > ĸen > -- 4.14.12 has the same problem. However I was able to boot it successfully by using the command line parameter "acpi=off". I have no idea what not having acpi will do to my system! I'm attaching the end of the earlier kernel panic messages (painstakingly transcribed by hand) in case someone finds it informative. The odd thing is that a diff of the configuration files for 4.12.8 (the native LFS-8.1 kernel) and 4.14.12 does not show anything new that's relevant to acpi. There must be some difference in the code itself. -- Hazel acpi_kernel_panic Description: Binary data -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] Hot diggity dog
On 6.1.2018. 17:34, Ken Moffat wrote: On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 11:15:04AM -0500, Baho Utot wrote: If that works then I would like to build a kernel that is mostly modules: What will I have to add for drivers to get it boot. First, whichever filesystem you are using for the root filesystem. Second, run lspci -vvv on the host system to see which kernel drivers are being used for the disk(s). If you have multiple drivers for different SATA ports, you might find it easiest to build them all in - on one of my very old machines, the connection which the BIOS recognises as the primary disk (yes, it's old) is not using the chipset's SATA driver, it is using an additional driver. Using lsmod might also help in identifying hardware modules for things like the sensors. Usually, getting everything set up for the first time takes some trial and error. ĸen You can find a simple write-up on what's needed to build into kernel so your system can boot at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~krejzi/basic-kernel.txt It's mostly what Ken said, with pointers to kernel options in menuconfig. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] Hot diggity dog
On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 11:15:04AM -0500, Baho Utot wrote: > > If that works then I would like to build a kernel that is mostly modules: > > What will I have to add for drivers to get it boot. > First, whichever filesystem you are using for the root filesystem. Second, run lspci -vvv on the host system to see which kernel drivers are being used for the disk(s). If you have multiple drivers for different SATA ports, you might find it easiest to build them all in - on one of my very old machines, the connection which the BIOS recognises as the primary disk (yes, it's old) is not using the chipset's SATA driver, it is using an additional driver. Using lsmod might also help in identifying hardware modules for things like the sensors. Usually, getting everything set up for the first time takes some trial and error. ĸen -- Truth, in front of her huge walk-in wardrobe, selected black leather boots with stiletto heels for such a barefaced truth. - Unseen Academicals -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
[lfs-support] Hot diggity dog
Just finished my LFS-8.1 build. It has taken since Dec 18, 2017. I have my scripted build working. I need to create a kernel config file as the one I am using came from slackware. AMD64 platform Any one got any pointers how to do this without too much trouble? I would like to do make mrproper make defconfig make menuconfig then add Device Drivers ---> Generic Driver Options ---> [ ] Support for uevent helper [CONFIG_UEVENT_HELPER] [*] Maintain a devtmpfs filesystem to mount at /dev [CONFIG_DEVTMPFS] If that works then I would like to build a kernel that is mostly modules: What will I have to add for drivers to get it boot. Next up is adding rpm package manager and making spec files for all of chapter6 to the end. Thanks -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] stow for package management?
On 6 January 2018 at 02:08, Michael Shell wrote: > On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 20:51:58 + > Jorge Almeida wrote: > > > I just found out about stow. It just seems too good to be true. So: > > did I misunderstood something? Any gotchas that are not obvious? > > One package manager I have used before is porg (It had that name > long before Star Wars ever used it. Now we have to search using > > porg package manager > > rather than just porg to find the correct related sites): > > http://porg.sourceforge.net/ > > and I do like it. It does not use simlinks, but rather maintains > a database of the files installed. With stow, this filelist > information is carried by the symlinks themselves. The advantage > of stow is that the package installation step does not have to be > done as root. > > +1 for porg. I've used it continuously since it was paco and it works well for me. Richard -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] Page Table Isolation
On 5 January 2018 at 22:28, Paul Rogers wrote: > > Likewise, I'm not betting kernel patches will get pushed down to the > kernels that support those old systems. ext3 is not supported in the > latest kernels, so instructions to install the latest kernels will leave > many systems non-functional. I think patches need to be pushed back to > 3.19 kernels. > > Ext3 can be run as a reduced-functionality ext4 by simply mounting the partition as ext4 in /etc/fstab. Richard -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] stow for package management?
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 2:08 AM, Michael Shell wrote: > On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 20:51:58 + > Jorge Almeida wrote: > >> I just found out about stow. It just seems too good to be true. So: >> did I misunderstood something? Any gotchas that are not obvious? > > > > Another possible "gotcha" is when the package to be installed wants > to tweak something (else) in the main filesystem, say /etc, versus > just add something to /path/to/stow/foo/etc Yes, I suppose that was to be expected. Still, much better than installing and loosing track... > One package manager I have used before is porg (It had that name > long before Star Wars ever used it. Now we have to search using > > and I do like it. It does not use simlinks, but rather maintains > a database of the files installed. With stow, this filelist > information is carried by the symlinks themselves. The advantage > of stow is that the package installation step does not have to be > done as root. > I suppose the database must require at least the same amount of space as the forest of symlinks, probably more, so I think my reluctance about the symlinks was unwarranted. I found about porg yesterday (and I didn't see the SW movie yet!!). The interface seems nice, but the talk about the innards (catching system call et al.) makes me uncomfortable. The down-to-earth approach of stow seems to match the LFS way. Cheers Jorge -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Re: [lfs-support] stow for package management?
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 12:59 AM, Erich Schulman (KT4VOL/KTN4CA) wrote: > On Friday, January 5, 2018, Jorge Almeida wrote: >> >> > >> > I have used xstow on my Debian box since 2010. (Despite the "x", it is not a > GUI application.) I have been pleased with it. My pattern is ./configure > --prefix=/usr/local/stow/foo-1.0.0; make install, and then I xstow the > package. > > You'll want to look at and edit the xstow.ini file. In particular, you'll > likely want to add directories to the list of dirs to never remove -- > perhaps your entire existing /usr/local tree (assuming you use > /usr/local/stow). When you are ready to make install something, check that > every directory needed under /usr/local exists first. Make any new dirs, > make install, then run xstow. Example: if foo(6) creates a man6/foo.6 file, > be sure the /usr/local/share/man/man6 directory exists before you run xstow. > Once I paid attention to those details I have never had a problem with > xstow. > > Xstow indeed makes symbolic links. Every file in and below > /usr/local/stow/foo-1.0.0 will get a symlink in its corresponding place > under /usr/local. They are removed when you uninstall a package. Foo's > directory will be left intact so you can re-stow or delete as desired. > > Give it a try. Find a source tarball that's small and doesn't create a lot > of files. Then install and uninstall the package with your file manager > running and see how it works. > I'll take a look at xstow, to see the differences from plain stow. I already installed two packages with stow and it went well. Thanks for the input. Jorge -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
