Skip to content
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

[Feature Request] Support 5.15 and 6.1 LTS kernels #3837

Closed
3 tasks done
kzys opened this issue Jun 16, 2023 · 6 comments · Fixed by #4151
Closed
3 tasks done

[Feature Request] Support 5.15 and 6.1 LTS kernels #3837

kzys opened this issue Jun 16, 2023 · 6 comments · Fixed by #4151
Assignees
Labels
Priority: High Indicates than an issue or pull request should be resolved ahead of issues or pull requests labelled
Milestone

Comments

@kzys
Copy link
Contributor

kzys commented Jun 16, 2023

Feature Request

Firecracker's supported kernel versions are currently 4.14 and 5.10, but now there are 5.15 and 6.1 LTS kernels too.

Would Firecracker support these new LTS kernels in 2023 or 2024?

Describe the desired solution

Support these kernels.

Describe possible alternatives

Firecracker isn't strongly tied to Linux kernel versions. So customers still can use these newer LTS versions at "own risk".

Additional context

Checks

  • Have you searched the Firecracker Issues database for similar requests?
  • Have you read all the existing relevant Firecracker documentation?
  • Have you read and understood Firecracker's core tenets?
@pb8o pb8o self-assigned this Jun 21, 2023
@pb8o
Copy link
Contributor

pb8o commented Jun 21, 2023

Hi! Thanks for your interest. We have some preliminary support for 6.1 in the main branch, but not in a supported release. We are actively working on it, but we don't have a concrete date. As for 5.15, we currently don't have plans to support it.

@cperciva
Copy link
Contributor

cperciva commented Jul 2, 2023

@pb8o I have a closely related request -- I considered opening a new issue but figured it might be more useful to mention it here. With a 5.15 kernel Firecracker is working for me except that the tests fail with

E   FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: '/firecracker/tests/integration_tests/performance/configs/test_block_performance_config_5.15.json'

Even if 5.15 isn't officially supported, can the tests be adjusted to skip tests (or at least provide a more helpful error message) where they need (and lack) a configuration defined for the kernel?

@roypat
Copy link
Contributor

roypat commented Jul 3, 2023

Hi @cperciva,
the issue you describe looks like #3726 (which accidentally got closed because I mentioned it in a commit it seems, sorry about that). As a workaround (until we fix up the block test, which hopefully will happen as soon as some refractoring work is done 🤞), you can do ./tools/devtool test -- integration_tests/functional, which makes pytest not even try to discover the performance tests.

@roypat
Copy link
Contributor

roypat commented Jul 7, 2023

Hi cperciva@, the issue you describe looks like #3726 (which accidentally got closed because I mentioned it in a commit it seems, sorry about that). As a workaround (until we fix up the block test, which hopefully will happen as soon as some refractoring work is done crossed_fingers), you can do ./tools/devtool test -- integration_tests/functional, which makes pytest not even try to discover the performance tests.

Fixed with #3940 :)

@rstrlcpy
Copy link

I've built 6.1 (with enabled nf_tables) and successfully booted it using v1.3.3 and ubuntu-22.04 rootfs. docker works well inside the micro VM.

@xmarcalx xmarcalx added the Priority: High Indicates than an issue or pull request should be resolved ahead of issues or pull requests labelled label Aug 7, 2023
@xmarcalx
Copy link
Contributor

xmarcalx commented Aug 7, 2023

HI,
As @pb8o sent in the previous message we are continuing to work to officially support kernel 6.1, which hopefully will be announced soon.
Of course, there is nothing that prevent you to starting use Firecracker also with different kernel versions than the one we specify but it is at your own risks

@pb8o pb8o mentioned this issue Oct 5, 2023
9 tasks
@JonathanWoollett-Light JonathanWoollett-Light added this to the 1.5 milestone Dec 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Priority: High Indicates than an issue or pull request should be resolved ahead of issues or pull requests labelled
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants