I'm working on a side project which requires me to configure and compile a tiny Linux System based on Ubuntu.
The result should be a tiny OS with the following features:
A Bootloader
A Kernel
A Process
A Thread
Miscellaneous (if possible)
A File System
Virtual memory
A Console
I read lots of documents about it, one of them being: http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~okeefe/p2b/buildMin/buildMin.html#toc3
I deleted the file system, and recompiled the kernel using make xconfig. I tried to deactivate modules and configurations many times, but it's not working for me.
How can I configure the kernel for the OS with only the features I listed above? What options can I disable or enable while still having a working system?
Having the Kernel very small is not important for Ubuntu, so maybe choosing Ubuntu is part of your problem. I would use as starting point what OpenWRT does. They do a good work making the Kernel small and it is easy to get started. OpenWrt Buildroot – Usage
try Linux From Scratch. It is a step by step approach on building a minimal Linux system from which you can evolve later on. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/.
Use Gentoo Linux distribution - it's great for practicing on creation of Linux systems. Gentoo has excellent setup documentation, for example about configuring the kernel.
And Gentoo is a little easier and faster to setup than Linux From Scratch (LFS). If you want to go deeper, then LFS may be a good learning step too.
I'm complety new to this but I finally got around to building a Linux kernel so far so good. I am following a guide here:
A10-OLinuXino-LIME
My problem/concern is now I am in a .config menu and I've been searching online to no avail to determine what does it mean by a modularizes features verse includes, like should I switch to if I want those features to be there?
Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated it! I'm primarily doing this to include WiFi usb drivers I will be needing.
It depends on what system you run this kernel. If it's an embedded system, then you will probably be more concerned about memory benefits. In RAM you can win about several Kbytes per module. For the devices are not represented in the system/hardware, it then has a sense to put some drivers on Modules. Some modules can be taking more time when the kernel starts, and it is probably better to load them later, when the system is running.
You will probably be concerned about disk space, if you put some stuff Compiled-in so you can have a benefit because you don't need to have a module loading utility.
Have a look at this thread as well
I'm primarily doing this to include WiFi usb drivers I will be needing.
Its not necessary to build the complete kernel unless to build a USB WiFi driver. All you need is the kernel headers installed. From make menuconfig select the module you want to build, choose M, save the .config. This will build a module which can be loaded, instead of getting compiled as a part of the vmlinux image.
I am new to linux programming & interested to tweak linux kernel(though I am not sure, what to tweak, I am planning to write drivers for particular device). To learn internal of kernel, I have started from historic kernel release (first release).
My problem is, how to test whatever changes I am doing for development, without disturbing my current os environment.(ubuntu 12, 64 bit). Is there any way like virtual box, sandbox?
Along with these, if anybody send some good approaches to learn these things, I would be really greatful.
Thank You.
If you're new to linux programming then you really don't want to be tweaking the kernel. You really want to be an advanced programmer capable of programming drivers and complex software first.
But yes there is, you can can create a virtual machine using openbox or vmware. If you're really keen on tweaking the kernel you probably want to first just try compiling and configuring the kernel and seeing if that works.
Also make sure you're well acquainted with how the kernel works and advanced OS designs in general.
Search in google fr "Kernel configuration" you u will get many links how to configure your own kernel.
And one more thing do not use a outdated version of kernel ,always use latest stable release , because a lot of code and API is changed in new versions and no book in market is updated so ,, u have to read from kernel documentation. Thats the best way to learn the most updated information about linux kernel
Yes, you can test your changes on any of the commonly available virtual machines (VMs); that way, whatever changes you make to the VM kernel won't affect native OS.
Personally, I prefer using CentOS 64 bit on VMWare Player. With this setup, I got away with minimal system maintenance while was able to focus on the actual job at hand. Once the VM is up & running, you can download and compile one of the latest stable releases from kernel.org. Instructions on compiling your downloaded version of kernel could be found here and here; however, this may require little tweaking based on your actual setup. Once the VM is running on your desired version of kernel, using a combination of cscope and ctags will help you immensely in kernel code browsing.
Finally, if you want to become a serious kernel programmer and write your own device drivers, you need to get familiar with it in the first place. Below are a few excellent references -
Linux Device Driver by Corbet, Rubini, Kroah-Hartman, 3rd edition
Linux Kernel Development by Robert Love, 3rd edition
Understanding the Linux Kernel by Bovet, Cesati
Linux kernel source (ideally placed into your /usr/src/$(DESIRED_KERNEL) path, symlinked to /usr/src/linux)
Going through these books is a tedious job and chances are that you may hit the roadblock from time to time. kernelnewbies mailing list and StackOverflow are some of the few reliable places where people would be happy to answer to your queries.
Good luck!
I wanted to validate/test/benchmark set of features I have added to the ext4 kernel_tree/fs.
I came across Spruce Linux file system driver verification. Especially for filesystem.
The project is hosted #https://code.google.com/p/spruce/wiki/GettingStarted.
and this is for x86.
I work on arm target, and I have few questions before starting off.
Has anybody worked on Spruce earlier.
how to use Spruce project for ARM, Do we need to port for ARM?
Is cross compilation straight forward or any changes need to be done.
I have gone through this paper: http://syrcose.ispras.ru/2012/files/submissions/25_syrcose2012_submission_21.pdf
there is no information on ARM and its support.
Please someone explain/help who has any work experience/knowledge on Spruce project.
Spruce was intended to work as follows. It provides a set of tests that make the kernel module for a given file system execute as many paths in the code as possible. It allows to use some external analyzers (such as the tools from KEDR framework) to detect different kinds of errors: memory leaks, etc.
All that was primarily intended for x86.
While it might be possible to port the tests themselves to ARM, one will need to choose the analyzers that work on that platform too. KEDR tools are currently for x86 only but one may try Kmemleak, Fault injection facilities and other tools on ARM instead.
Spruce seems to be a work in progress still. I see, you opened a ticket concerning ARM support in their issue tracker, I think, it is the right thing to do.
I would also suggest to take a look at Phoronix Test Suite. It is currently widely used for testing and benchmarking, including the analysis of file system kernel modules. See this article for example. It seems to work on ARM although I haven't tried it there myself.
The best tool for testing/validating a file system is xfstests. I have written tools to make it easy to validate xfstests for ext4. See: http://thunk.org/gce-xfstests for more details.
There is also an alpha-test level support for using this on ARM directly: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4/53649/focus=53659
This has been used successfully to test ext4 on an Android device, although to be honest, most of the time what I do is to bludgeon an Android kernel until it will build on x86, and then use kvm-xfstests gce-xfstests, since it's much more convenient. In particular with gce-xfstests, I can just do a "fire and forget", and then when the test completes I get a test report in my e-mail. Where as with the Android arm xfstests tarball, the automation isn't done yet, so you have to manually set up an external USB-attached USB device, hook it up via some kind of USB C hub, or if you are going to use an OTG usb adapter, you need to make sure the Android device can receive power while it is also driving the OTG usb port --- and you have to manually set up the chroot. Unless the BSP kernel has been badly abused so you can't figure out how to make it build on x86 (getting the MSM kernel to work on x86 wasn't easy) testing on gce-xfstests may be much simpler at the end of the day.
How do the Linux kernel developers test their code locally and after they have it committed? Do they use some kind of unit testing and build automation? Test plans?
The Linux kernel has a heavy emphasis on community testing.
Typically, any developer will test their own code before submitting, and quite often they will be using a development version of the kernel from Linus, or one of the other unstable/development trees for a project relevant to their work. This means they are often testing both their changes and other people's changes.
There tends not to be much in the way of formal test plans, but extra testing may be asked for before features are merged into upstream trees.
As Dean pointed out, there's also some automated testing: The Linux Test Project and the kernel Autotest (good overview).
Developers will often also write automated tests targeted to test their change, but I'm not sure there's a (often used) mechanism to centrally collect these ad hoc tests.
It depends a lot on which area of the kernel is being changed of course - the testing you'd do for a new network driver is quite different to the testing you'd do when replacing the core scheduling algorithm.
Naturally, the kernel itself and its parts are tested prior to the release, but these tests cover only the basic functionality. There are some testing systems which perform testing of Linux Kernel:
The Linux Test Project (LTP) delivers test suites to the open source community that validate the reliability and stability of Linux. The LTP test suite contains a collection of tools for testing the Linux kernel and related features.
Autotest—a framework for fully automated testing. It is designed primarily to test the Linux kernel, though it is useful for many other purposes such as qualifying new hardware, virtualization testing, and other general user space program testing under Linux platforms. It's an open-source project under the GPL and is used and developed by a number of organizations, including Google, IBM, Red Hat, and many others.
Also there are certification systems developed by some major GNU/Linux distribution companies. These systems usually check complete GNU/Linux distributions for compatibility with hardware. There are certification systems developed by Novell, Red Hat, Oracle, Canonical, and Google.
There are also systems for dynamic analysis of the Linux kernel:
Kmemleak is a memory leak detector included in the Linux kernel. It provides a way of detecting possible kernel memory leaks in a way similar to a tracing garbage collector with the difference that the orphan objects are not freed, but only reported via /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak.
Kmemcheck traps every read and write to memory that was allocated dynamically (i.e., with kmalloc()). If a memory address is read that has not previously been written to, a message is printed to the kernel log. It is also is a part of the Linux kernel.
Fault Injection Framework (included in the Linux kernel) allows for infusing errors and exceptions into an application's logic to achieve a higher coverage and fault tolerance of the system.
How do the Linux kernel developers test their code locally and after they have it committed?
Do they use some kind of unit testing and build automation?
In the classic sense of words, no.
For example, Ingo Molnar is running the following workload:
build a new kernel with a random set of configuration options
boot into it
go to 1
Every build fail, boot fail, bug or runtime warning is dealt with. 24/7. Multiply by several boxes, and one can uncover quite a lot of problems.
Test plans?
No.
There may be a misunderstanding that there is a central testing facility, but there is none. Everyone does what he/she wants.
In-tree tools
A good way to find test tools in the kernel is to:
make help and read all targets
look under tools/testing
In v4.0, this leads me to:
kselftest under tools/testing/selftests. Run with make kselftest. Must be running built kernel already. See also: Documentation/kselftest.txt , https://kselftest.wiki.kernel.org/
ktest under tools/testing/ktest. See also: http://elinux.org/Ktest , http://www.slideshare.net/satorutakeuchi18/kernel-auto-testbyktest
Static analysers section of make help, which contains targets like:
checkstack: Perl: what does checkstack.pl in linux source do?
coccicheck for Coccinelle (mentioned by askb)
Kernel CI
https://kernelci.org/ is a project that aims to make kernel testing more automated and visible.
It appears to do only build and boot tests (TODO how to test automatically that boot worked Source should be at https://github.com/kernelci/).
Linaro seems to be the main maintainer of the project, with contributions from many big companies: https://kernelci.org/sponsors/
Linaro Lava
http://www.linaro.org/initiatives/lava/ looks like a CI system with focus on development board bringup and the Linux kernel.
ARM LISA
https://github.com/ARM-software/lisa
Not sure what it does in detail, but it is by ARM and Apache Licensed, so likely worth a look.
Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXZzzUEngiU
Step debuggers
Not really unit testing, but may help once your tests start failing:
QEMU + GDB: https://stackoverflow.com/a/42316607/895245
KGDB: https://stackoverflow.com/a/44226360/895245
My own QEMU + Buildroot + Python setup
I also started a setup focused on ease of development, but I ended up adding some simple testing capabilities to it as well: https://github.com/cirosantilli/linux-kernel-module-cheat/tree/8217e5508782827320209644dcbaf9a6b3141724#test-this-repo
I haven't analyzed all the other setups in great detail, and they likely do much more than mine, however I believe that my setup is very easy to get started with quickly because it has a lot of documentation and automation.
It’s not very easy to automate kernel testing. Most Linux developers do the testing on their own, much like adobriyan mentioned.
However, there are a few things that help with debugging the Linux Kernel:
kexec: A system call that allows you to put another kernel into memory and reboot without going back to the BIOS, and if it fails, reboot back.
dmesg: Definitely the place to look for information about what happened during the kernel boot and whether it works/doesn't work.
Kernel Instrumentation: In addition to printk's (and an option called 'CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME' which allows you to see (to microsecond accuracy) when the kernel output what), the kernel configuration allows you to turn on a lot of tracers that enable them to debug what is happening.
Then, developers usually have others review their patches. Once the patches are reviewed locally and seen not to interfere with anything else, and the patches are tested to work with the latest kernel from Linus without breaking anything, the patches are pushed upstream.
Here's a nice video detailing the process a patch goes through before it is integrated into the kernel.
In addition to the other answers, this emphasise more on the functionality testing, hardware certification testing and performance testing the Linux kernel.
A lot of testing actually happen through scripts, static code analysis tools, code reviews, etc. which is very efficient in catching bugs, which would otherwise break something in the application.
Sparse – An open-source tool designed to find faults in the Linux kernel.
Coccinelle is another program does matching and transformation engine which provides the language SmPL (Semantic Patch Language) for specifying desired matches and transformations in C code.
checkpatch.pl and other scripts - coding style issues can be found in the file Documentation/CodingStyle in the kernel source tree. The important thing to remember when reading it is not that this style is somehow better than any other style, just that it is consistent. This helps developers easily find and fix coding style issues. The script scripts/checkpatch.pl in the kernel source tree has been developed for it. This script can point out problems easily, and should always be run by a developer on their changes, instead of having a reviewer waste their time by pointing out problems later on.
There are also:
MMTests which is collection of benchmarks and scripts to analyze the results.
Trinity which is Linux system call fuzz tester.
Also the LTP pages at SourceForge are quite outdated and the project has moved to GitHub.
I would imagine they use virtualization to do quick tests. It could be something like QEMU, VirtualBox or Xen, and some scripts to perform configurations and automated tests.
Automated testing is probably done by trying either many random configurations or a few specific ones (if they are working with a specific issue). Linux has a lot of low-level tools (such as dmesg) to monitor and log debug data from the kernel, so I imagine that is used as well.
As far as I know, there is an automatically performance regression check tool (named lkp/0 day) running/funding by the Intel. It will test each valid patch sent to the mailing list and check the scores changed from different microbenchmarks such as hackbench, fio, unixbench, netperf, etc.
Once there is a performance regression/improvement, a corresponding report will be sent directly to the patch author and a Cc related maintainers.
LTP and Memtests are generally preferred tools.
adobriyan mentioned Ingo's loop of random configuration build testing. That is pretty much now covered by the 0-day test bot (aka kbuild test bot). A nice article about the infrastructure is presented here: Kernel Build/boot testing
The idea behind this set-up is to notify the developers ASAP so that they can rectify the errors soon enough (before the patches make it into Linus' tree in some cases as the kbuild infrastructure also tests against maintainer's subsystem trees).
Once after contributors submit their patch files and after making a merge request, Linux gatekeepers are checking the patch by integrating and reviewing it. Once it succeeds, they will merge the patch into the relevant branch and a make new version release.
The Linux Test Project is the main source which provides test scenarios (test cases) to run against the kernel after applying patches. This may take around 2 ~ 4 hours, and it depends.
Please note regarding the file system of the selected kernel is going to test against.
Example: ext4 generates different results against ext3 and so on.
Kernel Testing procedure.
Get latest kernel source from the repository (The Linux Kernel Archives or GitHub)
Apply the patch file (using a diff tool)
Build the new kernel.
Test against test procedures in LTP (Linux Test Project)
I had done Linux kernel compilation and done some modifications for Android (Android 6.0 (Marshmallow) and Android 7.0 (Nougat)) in which I use Linux version 3. I cross-compiled it on a Linux system, debugged the errors manually and then ran its boot image file in Android and checked if it was going in a loop-hole or not. If it runs perfect then it means it is compiled perfectly according to system requirements.
For MotoG kernel Compilation
Note: The Linux kernel will change according to requirements which depend on system hardware