OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Muggeridge, Matt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2083 bytes --]

Hi,

OpenBMC v2.10 is desirable because it has the 5.10 kernel, with an LTS of Dec 2026. Though, I need some clarification, please.

I see a few pieces of information that cause me to question if there will be an OpenBMC 2.10 release.

In a message from Patrick Williams (appended) he states 2.9 was the last release and the plan is to target January 14th, 2022 for a 2.11 release. What about 2.10?

Meanwhile, at the time of this message, there are no release notes<https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/release/release-notes.md> reported for 2.10.  Though, the Current Release Content<https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/wiki/Current-Release-Content/b8934b1382409fdecf996fed6c56339e76717f2c> suggests 2.10 has been released.  If so, when was it released?

Can someone clarify the status of v2.10?

Thanks,
Matt.


From patrick at stwcx.xyz<http://localhost:8080/source/s?path=stwcx.xyz&project=openbmc_mail>  Thu Dec 16 09:14:10 2021

From: patrick at stwcx.xyz<http://localhost:8080/source/s?path=stwcx.xyz&project=openbmc_mail> (Patrick Williams)

Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:14:10 -0600

Subject: Upcoming OpenBMC release 2.11

Message-ID: <YbposjOPwc1puNvR@heinlein>



Hello,



It has been almost a year since our last release (2.9).  We created a tag for

2.10.0-rc1 but it was never completed.  We recently created a branch for the

upstream Yocto Honister release and primed it with everything that was in our

`master` plus an update of Yocto to the Honister release branch.



What I'd like to do is target January 14th, 2022 for our 2.11 release.  If you

are interested in your systems working on that release branch, please test the

'honister' branch and let me know of any issues you see either here or in

#release-planning.



Since there has typically not been tons of demand on release branches and

support of them, this is going to be a low-effort process.  If anyone is

interested in better defining (and executing) a release process going forward,

we are certainly interested in volunteers.


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6528 bytes --]

Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Patrick Williams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2128 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 04:50:40AM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> OpenBMC v2.10 is desirable because it has the 5.10 kernel, with an LTS of Dec 2026. Though, I need some clarification, please.

The v2.10-rc1 tag is also based on Yocto Hardknott which is EOL in March 2022.
To me, this is far more important than the kernel EOL for 5.15 being in October
2023.

> I see a few pieces of information that cause me to question if there will be an OpenBMC 2.10 release.

The v2.10-rc1 tag was made back in May and nobody seemed to care enough to push
for a formal release to be done.  I don't expect this to be done now.

> In a message from Patrick Williams (appended) he states 2.9 was the last release and the plan is to target January 14th, 2022 for a 2.11 release. What about 2.10?
> 
> Meanwhile, at the time of this message, there are no release notes<https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/release/release-notes.md> reported for 2.10.  Though, the Current Release Content<https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/wiki/Current-Release-Content/b8934b1382409fdecf996fed6c56339e76717f2c> suggests 2.10 has been released.  If so, when was it released?
> 
> Can someone clarify the status of v2.10?

There don't seem to be anyone vocally interested in any releases.  I mentioned
hypothetically making a release for v2.11 and nobody responded.  I think there
was a simple regression test ran on Witherspoon but beyond that we have no
information on the stability of that branch.

As best I can tell, most companies that are active in the development either
work off `master` or have their own internal release process.  I keep hearing
small comments here and there on Discord like "I'm building a machine based on
vx.y" but I have no idea why they chose "vx.y" and quite often they're only
asking because they ran into a bug that has already been fixed on `master`.

If there really are people that are interested in us making formal releases,
we need people to express a real interest and contribute (at a minimum) some
testing to the release-candidate branches.

-- 
Patrick Williams

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

RE: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Muggeridge, Matt]

Thanks Patrick.  Comments embedded.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Williams <patrick@stwcx.xyz>
> Sent: Tuesday, 1 February 2022 12:42 AM
> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2@hpe.com>
> Cc: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please
> 
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 04:50:40AM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > OpenBMC v2.10 is desirable because it has the 5.10 kernel, with an LTS of
> Dec 2026. Though, I need some clarification, please.
> 
> The v2.10-rc1 tag is also based on Yocto Hardknott which is EOL in March 2022.
> To me, this is far more important than the kernel EOL for 5.15 being in October
> 2023.
>

I agree a longer LTS for the 5.15 kernel would be needed before it becomes attractive.

A couple of points to clarify...

- Historically, the kernel EOL is evidently reviewed in Feb/Mar timeframe. As has happened before, it is initially announced with a 2yr EOL and if there is sufficient support from other companies, then it is extended by another 4yrs, for a total of 6yrs. Given it's Feb now (at least it is here 😊), I guess we will know soon if 5.15 EOL will be extended out to 2027.

- The 5.15 kernel is in OpenBMC/master, which I guess will be branched as kirkstone sometime from June (based on historically OpenBMC releases branch ~3mo after Yocto release). At this point in time, the more interesting release is OpenBMC 2.10-rc/hardknott which has the Linux kernel 5.10 with an LTS till Dec 2026.  Therefore, I became interested in the 2.10 release, which you have helped clarify for me.

> > I see a few pieces of information that cause me to question if there will be an
> OpenBMC 2.10 release.
> 
> The v2.10-rc1 tag was made back in May and nobody seemed to care enough
> to push for a formal release to be done.  I don't expect this to be done now.
> 
> > In a message from Patrick Williams (appended) he states 2.9 was the last
> release and the plan is to target January 14th, 2022 for a 2.11 release. What
> about 2.10?
> >
> > Meanwhile, at the time of this message, there are no release
> notes<https://github.com/openbmc/docs/blob/master/release/release-
> notes.md> reported for 2.10.  Though, the Current Release
> Content<https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/wiki/Current-Release-
> Content/b8934b1382409fdecf996fed6c56339e76717f2c> suggests 2.10 has
> been released.  If so, when was it released?
> >
> > Can someone clarify the status of v2.10?
> 
> There don't seem to be anyone vocally interested in any releases.  I mentioned
> hypothetically making a release for v2.11 and nobody responded.  I think there
> was a simple regression test ran on Witherspoon but beyond that we have no
> information on the stability of that branch.
> 
> As best I can tell, most companies that are active in the development either
> work off `master` or have their own internal release process.  I keep hearing
> small comments here and there on Discord like "I'm building a machine based
> on vx.y" but I have no idea why they chose "vx.y" and quite often they're only
> asking because they ran into a bug that has already been fixed on `master`.
> 
> If there really are people that are interested in us making formal releases, we
> need people to express a real interest and contribute (at a minimum) some
> testing to the release-candidate branches.
> 
> --
> Patrick Williams

Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Patrick Williams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 397 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 09:01:31PM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
 
> - The 5.15 kernel is in OpenBMC/master, which I guess will be branched as 
> kirkstone sometime from June (based on historically OpenBMC releases branch 
> ~3mo after Yocto release). 

FWIW, our honister branch, which should become 2.11 if we ever make that tag,
is also using the 5.15 kernel.

-- 
Patrick Williams

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

RE: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Muggeridge, Matt]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Williams <patrick@stwcx.xyz>
> Sent: Tuesday, 1 February 2022 8:55 AM
> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2@hpe.com>
> Cc: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please
> 
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 09:01:31PM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> 
> > - The 5.15 kernel is in OpenBMC/master, which I guess will be branched
> > as kirkstone sometime from June (based on historically OpenBMC
> > releases branch ~3mo after Yocto release).
> 
> FWIW, our honister branch, which should become 2.11 if we ever make that
> tag, is also using the 5.15 kernel.
> 

That is interesting!  How do I determine which version of the kernel is included in which version of OpenBMC?

I had been checking the poky.conf file for PREFERRED_VERSION, but for honister that shows as 5.14. (e.g. see https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/honister/poky/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf#L22)

> --
> Patrick Williams

Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Patrick Williams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2337 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 12:40:38AM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> > > - The 5.15 kernel is in OpenBMC/master, which I guess will be branched
> > > as kirkstone sometime from June (based on historically OpenBMC
> > > releases branch ~3mo after Yocto release).
> > 
> > FWIW, our honister branch, which should become 2.11 if we ever make that
> > tag, is also using the 5.15 kernel.
> > 
> 
> That is interesting!  How do I determine which version of the kernel is included in which version of OpenBMC?
> 
> I had been checking the poky.conf file for PREFERRED_VERSION, but for honister that shows as 5.14. (e.g. see https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/honister/poky/meta-poky/conf/distro/poky.conf#L22)

Uh, I guess I didn't even think to check how you decided that we were using 5.10
for our 2.10 branch.  I don't think anyone in OpenBMC uses the default/vanilla
kernel tree from upstream Yocto/poky, which is what you're looking at there.

You'll want to look at the meta-aspeed or meta-nuvoton depending on your
hardware.

- 2.9 aspeed is on 5.10.36: 
    - https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/d767d3fb1ba70f03e0e212c24f41404f1248f660/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2
- 2.10 aspeed is on 5.15.5: 
    - https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/415294223a164a804e31e39c90043d15e9b153de/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2
- 2.11/master aspeed is on 5.15.18: 
    - https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/9a2a1dade6b355dafe6e72cfb26732ca5e12587f/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2

Nuvoton might be slightly different.  Surprisingly they are on the 5.14 branch
in master.  I currently only use Aspeed hardware so that's what I pay attention
to.

Since you have a HPE email address, I assume you don't even care about Aspeed or
Nuvoton but really care about your own GXP hardware, so none of this is even
relevant to you.  You're going to have to get your drivers upstreamed and then
backported into one of our kernel trees.  I don't think Joel is maintaining the
5.10.x tree, so if for some reason you really want to backport onto that you're
probably going to have to have a discussion with him about how to do
maintenance.  The simplest path is going to be to be on 5.15 like Aspeed /
master is. 

-- 
Patrick Williams

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

RE: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please

[Muggeridge, Matt]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Williams <patrick@stwcx.xyz>
> Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2022 3:16 AM
> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2@hpe.com>
> Cc: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
> Subject: Re: OpenBMC v2.10/Hardknott status please
> 
> On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 12:40:38AM +0000, Muggeridge, Matt wrote:
> > > > - The 5.15 kernel is in OpenBMC/master, which I guess will be
> > > > branched as kirkstone sometime from June (based on historically
> > > > OpenBMC releases branch ~3mo after Yocto release).
> > >
> > > FWIW, our honister branch, which should become 2.11 if we ever make
> > > that tag, is also using the 5.15 kernel.
> > >
> >
> > That is interesting!  How do I determine which version of the kernel is
> included in which version of OpenBMC?
> >
> > I had been checking the poky.conf file for PREFERRED_VERSION, but for
> > honister that shows as 5.14. (e.g. see
> > https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/honister/poky/meta-poky/conf/d
> > istro/poky.conf#L22)
> 
> Uh, I guess I didn't even think to check how you decided that we were using
> 5.10 for our 2.10 branch.  I don't think anyone in OpenBMC uses the
> default/vanilla kernel tree from upstream Yocto/poky, which is what you're
> looking at there.
> 
> You'll want to look at the meta-aspeed or meta-nuvoton depending on your
> hardware.
> 
> - 2.9 aspeed is on 5.10.36:
>     -
> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/d767d3fb1ba70f03e0e212c24f414
> 04f1248f660/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2
> - 2.10 aspeed is on 5.15.5:
>     -
> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/415294223a164a804e31e39c9004
> 3d15e9b153de/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2
> - 2.11/master aspeed is on 5.15.18:
>     -
> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc/blob/9a2a1dade6b355dafe6e72cfb2673
> 2ca5e12587f/meta-aspeed/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-aspeed_git.bb#L2
> 
> Nuvoton might be slightly different.  Surprisingly they are on the 5.14 branch in
> master.  I currently only use Aspeed hardware so that's what I pay attention to.
> 
> Since you have a HPE email address, I assume you don't even care about
> Aspeed or Nuvoton but really care about your own GXP hardware, so none of
> this is even relevant to you.  You're going to have to get your drivers
> upstreamed and then backported into one of our kernel trees.  I don't think Joel
> is maintaining the 5.10.x tree, so if for some reason you really want to backport
> onto that you're probably going to have to have a discussion with him about
> how to do maintenance.  The simplest path is going to be to be on 5.15 like
> Aspeed / master is.
> 

Thanks again Patrick.  Good info!  Agreed that 5.15 is highly desirable.

> --
> Patrick Williams