Hi Ross, I really appreciate the feedback! I agree that passing timestamp information is the proper solution here. I'll create a new patch that does this.
Be well, - Levi On 1/9/26 10:03, Ross Burton wrote: > On 31 Dec 2025, at 22:52, Levi Shafter via lists.openembedded.org > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The fsck in oe_mkext234fs() was added to prevent an extra reboot on the >> target: >> >> https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=a93d0059341 >> >> This has the side effect of increasing delta between images which >> prevents reproducibility. In many cases, the added security provided by >> image reproducibility is worth the extra reboot upon first booting the >> target. The use of fsck should be included by default, but left >> configurable. >> >> [YOCTO #16110] > > There’s slightly more information in the bug report than here, which links to > a video from YPS 2024.12 talking about how fsck will modify timestamps in > file systems, so whilst the initial ext4 from mkfs is reproducible, we do a > fsck to clear flags and they’re no longer bit-identical. Is this the only > source of non-determinism that you’re observing? > > I don’t think adding an option is the right thing here as you’re swapping one > problem (non-reproducible ext4) with another (filesystem dirty, needs a > reboot). As the video shows, we should be passing timestamp information at > construction time to avoid this problem. Would you be able to work on a patch > to do that instead? > > Thanks, > Ross
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#229219): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/229219 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/117020092/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
