Bug 2303727 - Netbooting not working with 2.12
Summary: Netbooting not working with 2.12
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: grub2
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Leo Sandoval
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: F41FinalFreezeException
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-08-08 17:06 UTC by Chris Adams
Modified: 2024-10-12 00:19 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version: grub2-2.12-9.fc41
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-10-12 00:19:43 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Chris Adams 2024-08-08 17:06:36 UTC
I saw the update had landed in rawhide, so I tested it in one of my use cases: network booting. I tried from VMs configured for BIOS-TFTP, UEFI-TFTP, and UEFI-HTTP (UEFI with Secure Boot enabled and disabled). All fail.

With BIOS, it loads core.0 via TFTP, prints "Welcome to GRUB!" (in reverse video), and stops.

With UEFI (TFTP or HTTP, with shimx64.efi first), it loads grubx64.efi, prints "dynamic_load_symbols 0x7d97e000", although the number is different for different methods (guess it's an address?), and stops.

This is with files from grub2-2.12-3.fc41 and shim-x64-15.8-3. Changing back to the files from grub2-2.06-119.fc40 works.

Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Leo Sandoval 2024-08-08 17:30:44 UTC
(In reply to Chris Adams from comment #0)
> I saw the update had landed in rawhide, so I tested it in one of my use
> cases: network booting. I tried from VMs configured for BIOS-TFTP,
> UEFI-TFTP, and UEFI-HTTP (UEFI with Secure Boot enabled and disabled). All
> fail.
> 
> With BIOS, it loads core.0 via TFTP, prints "Welcome to GRUB!" (in reverse
> video), and stops.
> 
> With UEFI (TFTP or HTTP, with shimx64.efi first), it loads grubx64.efi,
> prints "dynamic_load_symbols 0x7d97e000", although the number is different
> for different methods (guess it's an address?), and stops.
> 
> This is with files from grub2-2.12-3.fc41 and shim-x64-15.8-3. Changing back
> to the files from grub2-2.06-119.fc40 works.
> 
> Reproducible: Always

Hi Chris,

We are aware of these issues and currently working to solve them. I let you know any update.

Comment 2 Chris Adams 2024-08-08 17:42:05 UTC
Sounds good! I know this was a big change, let me know if there's anything I can do to help with testing (debugging GRUB code itself is probably beyond my ability unfortunately).

Comment 3 Leo Sandoval 2024-08-08 17:54:09 UTC
(In reply to Chris Adams from comment #2)
> Sounds good! I know this was a big change, let me know if there's anything I
> can do to help with testing (debugging GRUB code itself is probably beyond
> my ability unfortunately).

Indeed, a big change. So far we have this issue and two reported by bodhi https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-a067416d33

Comment 4 Leo Sandoval 2024-09-02 16:29:26 UTC
team,
latest fedora rawhide has been update with patch fixes [1], please re-test using [2]. Internally we have tested several netboot scenarios (pxe, http, ipv4, ipv6, with and without secure-boot, on all supported archs) and all passing fine. In case any issue, please report it.

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/grub2/pull-request/104#
[2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=122703223

Comment 5 Chris Adams 2024-09-04 18:55:52 UTC
I tested BIOS, UEFI-PXE, and UEFI-HTTP (all over IPv4) successfully. Secure Boot failed with a security error (I guess this scratch build isn't signed with a key Fedora's shim recognizes).

Comment 6 Paul Whalen 2024-09-13 16:37:37 UTC
Also hit this when doing a PXE installation of the Fedora 41 Beta on AArch64 (grub2-efi-aa64-2.12-4.fc41), updating to grub2-efi-aa64-2.12-6.fc42 worked as expected.

Comment 7 Adam Williamson 2024-09-16 15:23:33 UTC
Leo, that build is a scratch build. There doesn't seem to have been an official build since 2.12-4 for F41 or Rawhide. Is there a plan to do official builds with the fix? Thanks.

Comment 8 Adam Williamson 2024-09-16 15:30:42 UTC
Huh, it seems like there was a 2.12-6.fc42 build done - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2543243 - but somehow it was never submitted as an update, and is tagged only for garbage collection. Not sure how that happened. Was it built on a side tag?

Comment 9 Leo Sandoval 2024-09-17 16:43:58 UTC
(In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #8)
> Huh, it seems like there was a 2.12-6.fc42 build done -
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2543243 - but somehow
> it was never submitted as an update, and is tagged only for garbage
> collection. Not sure how that happened. Was it built on a side tag?

The problem was that I did not have permissions to launch official build as seen here https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=123164869 but now I have access and just launched one, triggering the corresponding update https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-bb38ed83cb

Comment 10 Adam Williamson 2024-09-17 16:53:16 UTC
ohhh, right, of course, somehow I did not link up that conversation in my head :D

Comment 11 Leo Sandoval 2024-09-17 17:16:04 UTC
(In reply to Leo Sandoval from comment #9)
> (In reply to Adam Williamson from comment #8)
> > Huh, it seems like there was a 2.12-6.fc42 build done -
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2543243 - but somehow
> > it was never submitted as an update, and is tagged only for garbage
> > collection. Not sure how that happened. Was it built on a side tag?
> 
> The problem was that I did not have permissions to launch official build as
> seen here https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=123164869 but
> now I have access and just launched one, triggering the corresponding update
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-bb38ed83cb

Adam, my bad, last update went for ELN but not f41 because the latter failed https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=123550898 . We (well, nfrayer) are planning to merge soon another patch on rawhide which would bump the spec version, following by an official build.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2024-10-10 15:17:26 UTC
FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56 (grub2-2.12-9.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56

Comment 13 Adam Williamson 2024-10-10 16:40:44 UTC
Since there's only five days to Final freeze, proposing this as an FE in case it doesn't make it to stable by then. Fixing netboot issues is obviously a good thing to have in release if possible.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2024-10-11 01:36:18 UTC
FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56 has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2024-10-12 00:19:43 UTC
FEDORA-2024-2e76a9ff56 (grub2-2.12-9.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.