Bug 3050

Summary:	linux-yocto-3.0 Kernel is not being tested with 1.3 Poky branches
Product:	[QA/Testing] Test Plans/Suite	Reporter:	Rahul Saxena <rahul.saxena>
Component:	test-plans/suite	Assignee:	Laurentiu Serban <laurentiu.serban>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	Medium	CC:	mihai.lindner, sgw, tom.zanussi, yp.test.watcher, yp.watcher
Version:	1.3
Target Milestone:	1.4
Hardware:	x86
OS:	Multiple
Whiteboard:
OS type for building Yocto:	---	Type of Regression:	---
Verified:		Documentation change:	---

Description Rahul Saxena 2012-08-31 18:03:22 UTC

1.3 Poky branches are not being tested at all (are not part of test plan) with non-latest linux-yocto Kernels even though the support for these kernels are POR. This can lead to undetected problems creeping in for BSPs that need to use older kernels.

For instance the meta-cedartrail BSP does not boot with 3.0 kernel with Poky 1.3_M3, while it was booting OK with a earlier commit of the master branch.

When I try to boot a image such as core-image-sato, I get kernel 
panic and errors such as:

>> VFS: Cannot open root device "ram0" or unkown-block(0,0)

>> Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions:

>> VFS: unable to mount root fs on unknown block(0,0) User configuration error - no valid rootfilesystem found

>> I do see that the root file system exists in cedartrail-poky-linux/core-image-sato-1.0-r0/rootfs dir..

Comment 1 Rahul Saxena 2012-09-09 00:39:47 UTC

Hi Saul, Any update on this ? Thanks Rahul

Comment 2 Tom Zanussi 2012-09-18 14:38:37 UTC

The atom-pc and beagleboard machines are still using 3.0, so as long as those are being tested, there's coverage.

But it's a good point - we should make sure we have a version of at least one machine that remains and is tested with each kernel we support.  With the upgrades in master, it looks like we have 3.4 and 3.0 covered, and we have 3.2 covered by all the meta-intel BSPs in edison.

The latter brings up the question of whether the edison meta-intel BSPs count as coverage for 3.2.  If so, then cedartrail in master could itself be considered coverage for 3.0.  We probably need to formalize this.

Comment 3 Mihai Lindner 2012-09-21 10:53:04 UTC

The initial error """VFS: Cannot open root device "ram0" or unkown-block(0,0)""" was fixed:

http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/meta-intel/commit/?id=001b3945636bdf10245a2887751b38852cefe5db

Comment 4 Laurentiu Serban 2012-11-23 09:55:22 UTC

Taking this into consideration.
The issue will be set on resolved after integration of atom-pc image tests into weekly testing.

Comment 5 Laurentiu Serban 2012-11-26 20:54:13 UTC

This is now tested weekly using the atom-pc images