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

memtest86+: update / remove legacy memtest86 #61147

Merged
merged 2 commits into from May 17, 2019

Conversation

@c0bw3b
Copy link
Contributor

commented May 8, 2019

Motivation for this change

Legacy memtest86 was broken since 16.09 and we are already using memtest86+ from coreboot through boot.loader.grub.memtest86.enable.
Coreboot marked a more recent commit as stable and called it 5.01 coreboot 002 (we were actually shipping 5.01 coreboot 001 up to now). I tested building and running it in a x64 NixOS VM without issue.

This memtest is intended for BIOS-systems only.
The newer memtest86-efi from PassMark will be available for UEFI systems (see #60967).

Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nix-review --run "nix-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Assured whether relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

c0bw3b added some commits May 8, 2019

memtest86+: 5.01+coreboot-20180113 -> 5.01-coreboot-002
Latest stable stag of the coreboot fork
memtest86: remove and alias to memtest86plus
Legacy memtest86 was broken since NixOS 16.09
+ we've already been using memtest86+ fork
through 'boot.loader.grub.memtest86.enable'
@c0bw3b

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented May 17, 2019

@GrahamcOfBorg build memtest86plus

@c0bw3b c0bw3b merged commit d59e63f into NixOS:master May 17, 2019

14 of 16 checks passed

memtest86plus on aarch64-linux No attempt
Details
memtest86plus on x86_64-darwin No attempt
Details
Evaluation Performance Report Evaluator Performance Report
Details
grahamcofborg-eval ^.^!
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-check-maintainers matching changed paths to changed attrs...
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-check-meta config.nix: checkMeta = true
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-darwin nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./pkgs/top-level/release.nix -A darwin-tested
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./nixos/release-combined.nix -A tested
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos-manual nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./nixos/release.nix -A manual
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixos-options nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./nixos/release.nix -A options
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-manual nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./pkgs/top-level/release.nix -A manual
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-tarball nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./pkgs/top-level/release.nix -A tarball
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-nixpkgs-unstable-jobset nix-instantiate --arg nixpkgs { outPath=./.; revCount=999999; shortRev="ofborg"; } ./pkgs/top-level/release.nix -A unstable
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-package-list nix-env -qa --json --file .
Details
grahamcofborg-eval-package-list-no-aliases nix-env -qa --json --file . --arg config { allowAliases = false; }
Details
memtest86plus on x86_64-linux Success
Details

Picking up garbage automation moved this from To do to Done May 17, 2019

@c0bw3b c0bw3b deleted the c0bw3b:pkg/memtest branch May 17, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
1 participant
You can’t perform that action at this time.