-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 166
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Port s390x/other arches fixes from master to rhcos-4.2 with some tweaks #772
Conversation
src/virt-install
Outdated
# grub can detect /boot/ignition.firstboot file at first boot and add those parameters on the fly to $ignition_firstboot | ||
# zipl requires those to be added and a re-run of zipl program at build time | ||
if platform.machine() == "s390x": | ||
extra_kargs.append("ignition.firstboot rd.neednet=1 ip=dhcp coreos.oem.id=qemu ignition.platform.id=qemu") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
had to do what was done in gf-platformid , which is adding the oem here with qemu for s390x because it uses zipl. is there a better way of doing this ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The first three are good to me, but I'm not very sure about coreos.oem.id=qemu ignition.platform.id=qemu
. I would let the maintainer of rhcos-4.2
branch decide. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You should only need ignition.platform.id
since coreos/ignition-dracut#104
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Got it. thanks.
I think it's better to split this commit into multiple ones, as it does many different jobs. |
Yes, backports should include the cherry-picked commits being backported to make them easier to track.
OK, just to recap here: s390x no longer requires Anaconda on master, but we're still using it for RHCOS 4.2. I forget now why we can't backport those patches as well; are we just being conservative? |
Agreed that's a strong preference ( |
Yes - the idea is that with minimal changes we get rhcos for s390x built. Going forward , we will only use the anaconda-less method in |
@tuan-hoang1 @cgwalters @jlebon I think some of the patches didn't merge cleanly which is the reason why I did not cherry pick I believe. But I will verify once again and see if I can do that |
fc6db1a
to
d64cd94
Compare
closing this out and i will cherry pick commits and update as separate commits |
As an effort to get an rhcos 4.2 image built and also to get the pipeline going with the main focus as s390x,
this contains ports of fixes for issues specified in coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker#255
As an addition there were some changes that needed to be made in the kickstart file to get anaconda to work for s390x.
One caveat is that the fedora image used with the installation needs to have anaconda patched with s390 fixes for this to
work.