Description of problem: kernel-uki-virt does not list any provides for built-in symbols. kernel-uki-virt should list these provides just as kernel-core does. These provides are (afaik) generated from modules.builtin which is included in kernel-core. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Compare provides listed on https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=803064 to https://kojihub.stream.centos.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=803105 Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
(In reply to Peter Georg from comment #0) > Description of problem: > kernel-uki-virt does not list any provides for built-in symbols. > kernel-uki-virt should list these provides just as kernel-core does. These > provides are (afaik) generated from modules.builtin which is included in > kernel-core. Can you elaborate on why you think this is needed? UKI isn't a general purpose kernel that we'd expect anyone to build modules against. It's a self-contained, fully signed kernel used for a very specific usecase.
(In reply to Josh Boyer from comment #2) > Can you elaborate on why you think this is needed? > > UKI isn't a general purpose kernel that we'd expect anyone to build modules > against. It's a self-contained, fully signed kernel used for a very > specific usecase. I thought the kernel is the same but just distributed in a different format? I.e., all kernel modules built against the RHEL kernel should be loadable independently of whether one uses the unified kernel image or the "regular" one. So the question is not about building against a kernel, but about whether one can use third party kernel modules when using the universal kernel image without having to install the regular one in addition. If you do not expect anyone who is using the unified kernel image to install any third party kernel modules then these provides are not required and you can close this bug report.
(In reply to Peter Georg from comment #3) > (In reply to Josh Boyer from comment #2) > > Can you elaborate on why you think this is needed? > > > > UKI isn't a general purpose kernel that we'd expect anyone to build modules > > against. It's a self-contained, fully signed kernel used for a very > > specific usecase. > > I thought the kernel is the same but just distributed in a different format? > I.e., all kernel modules built against the RHEL kernel should be loadable > independently of whether one uses the unified kernel image or the "regular" > one. So the question is not about building against a kernel, but about > whether one can use third party kernel modules when using the universal > kernel image without having to install the regular one in addition. > > If you do not expect anyone who is using the unified kernel image to install > any third party kernel modules then these provides are not required and you > can close this bug report. Generally speaking your suggestion is correct and there is no reason to not support third party modules when UKI is used instead of the standard kernel-core. As we are in the very beginning on the adoption path, we wanted to limit UKI's use case to virtual machines (and thus 'kernel-uki-virt' name) where third party modules are less common. Let me take the BZ and run some experiments.
I've created an MR for Fedora/ARK: https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/2408 if things go well, we can do a similar change to RHEL.
(In reply to Vitaly Kuznetsov from comment #5) > I've created an MR for Fedora/ARK: > https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/2408 > if things go well, we can do a similar change to RHEL. The change was merged in Fedora/ARK some time ago and no issues were reported, pushing the change to RHEL as well.
# rpm -q --provides kernel-uki-virt-5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64.rpm > uki-provides # rpm -q --provides kernel-core-5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64.rpm > core-provides # diff -u core-provides uki-provides --- core-provides 2023-06-25 23:39:12.065892900 -0400 +++ uki-provides 2023-06-25 23:39:04.115430600 -0400 @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ installonlypkg(kernel) -kernel = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 kernel(IO_APIC_get_PCI_irq_vector) = 0x1eb922a3 kernel(I_BDEV) = 0xb99ad7c5 kernel(LZ4_decompress_fast) = 0x4c416eb9 @@ -11163,11 +11162,9 @@ kernel(zstd_init_dstream) = 0x3cbb940b kernel(zstd_is_error) = 0xafc6c68e kernel(zstd_reset_dstream) = 0xf1a65f7b -kernel-core = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 -kernel-core(x86-64) = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 -kernel-core-uname-r = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64 +kernel-uki-virt = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 +kernel-uki-virt(x86-64) = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 kernel-uname-r = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64 -kernel-x86_64 = 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9 kmod(8250.ko) kmod(8250_base.ko) kmod(8250_dw.ko) # rpm -ql kernel-uki-virt-5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64.rpm | grep System.map /lib/modules/5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64/System.map Tested good on 5.14.0-330.2721_908379996.el9.x86_64. For a comparison: # rpm -q --provides kernel-uki-virt-5.14.0-330.el9.x86_64.rpm installonlypkg(kernel) kernel-uki-virt = 5.14.0-330.el9 kernel-uki-virt(x86-64) = 5.14.0-330.el9 kernel-uname-r = 5.14.0-330.el9.x86_64
# rpm -q --provides kernel-uki-virt-5.14.0-333.el9.x86_64.rpm > uki-provides # rpm -q --provides kernel-core-5.14.0-333.el9.x86_64.rpm > core-provides # diff -u core-provides uki-provides --- core-provides 2023-07-03 04:19:26.491157525 -0400 +++ uki-provides 2023-07-03 04:16:50.714236417 -0400 @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ installonlypkg(kernel) -kernel = 5.14.0-333.el9 kernel(IO_APIC_get_PCI_irq_vector) = 0x1eb922a3 kernel(I_BDEV) = 0xbe821159 kernel(LZ4_decompress_fast) = 0x4c416eb9 @@ -11176,11 +11175,9 @@ kernel(zstd_init_dstream) = 0x3cbb940b kernel(zstd_is_error) = 0xafc6c68e kernel(zstd_reset_dstream) = 0xf1a65f7b -kernel-core = 5.14.0-333.el9 -kernel-core(x86-64) = 5.14.0-333.el9 -kernel-core-uname-r = 5.14.0-333.el9.x86_64 +kernel-uki-virt = 5.14.0-333.el9 +kernel-uki-virt(x86-64) = 5.14.0-333.el9 kernel-uname-r = 5.14.0-333.el9.x86_64 -kernel-x86_64 = 5.14.0-333.el9 kmod(8250.ko) kmod(8250_base.ko) kmod(8250_dw.ko) Tested good on 5.14.0-333.el9.x86_64.