Skip to content

Conversation

tonynguien
Copy link
Contributor

@tonynguien tonynguien commented Sep 25, 2025

Background

This change is the same as #344 which we inadvertently dropped when merging os-upgrade branch

The change enables CONFIG_DRM (Linux Direct Rendering Manager) kernel build option to include kernel graphic/driver framework which is necessary for graphical console on UEFI systems.

Solution

Enabling the CONFIG_DRM kernel build option.

Testing Done

  • ESX and HyperV VMs have graphical console
  • Graphical console works after upgrade 2025.5 VM to new version
  • AWS VM upgrade works as expected, secure boot enabled after upgrade/reboot

@tonynguien tonynguien force-pushed the dlpx/pr/tonynguien/29d8b4a6-9a57-48d7-b603-e2d01de2879d branch from b03c191 to 0bc070b Compare September 25, 2025 17:45
@tonynguien tonynguien force-pushed the dlpx/pr/tonynguien/29d8b4a6-9a57-48d7-b603-e2d01de2879d branch from 0bc070b to e25ab50 Compare September 30, 2025 23:42
@tonynguien tonynguien changed the title ESCL-5630 Framebuffer DLPX-95518 Cannot access graphics console with UEFI boot Sep 30, 2025
@tonynguien tonynguien marked this pull request as ready for review October 1, 2025 16:42
Copy link
Contributor

@prakashsurya prakashsurya left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

have we looked into how I lost this during the LTS merge work?

@tonynguien
Copy link
Contributor Author

have we looked into how I lost this during the LTS merge work?

I don't know how to look into that. And I'm not sure it's worth our effort at the moment.

@tonynguien tonynguien merged commit 96a8b28 into develop Oct 1, 2025
12 checks passed
@tonynguien tonynguien deleted the dlpx/pr/tonynguien/29d8b4a6-9a57-48d7-b603-e2d01de2879d branch October 1, 2025 16:53
@prakashsurya
Copy link
Contributor

have we looked into how I lost this during the LTS merge work?

I don't even see #344 in the origin/os-upgrade branch.. not sure how that got dropped from the project branch.. interesting..

@prakashsurya
Copy link
Contributor

And I'm not sure it's worth our effort at the moment.

Well, LTS upgrade work is something we'll have to do every couple years.. so I agree it doesn't really matter w.r.t. 2025.5.. but it would be good to understand the mistake so we can try to avoid this same mistake next time.. I'm guessing there was some manually merging or rebasing, and I forgot to git pull..

@tonynguien
Copy link
Contributor Author

And I'm not sure it's worth our effort at the moment.

Well, LTS upgrade work is something we'll have to do every couple years.. so I agree it doesn't really matter w.r.t. 2025.5.. but it would be good to understand the mistake so we can try to avoid this same mistake next time.. I'm guessing there was some manually merging or rebasing, and I forgot to git pull..

Yeah, it maybe good to document procedures and gotchas for future LTS upgrades.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants