From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25AB21FF13F for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:01:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5AB7E31F05; Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:02:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <9dec2493-7f82-4c8d-99b1-231901b0a4e2@proxmox.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:01:55 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel-helper] proxmox-boot: add memtest86 as entry to systemd-boot To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260225183621.201783-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: =?UTF-8?Q?Lauren=C8=9Biu_Leahu-Vl=C4=83ducu?= In-Reply-To: <20260225183621.201783-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1772114497134 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.118 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: PDTB6476KDCUSLHL2ADS3GDLQV2JFK5A X-Message-ID-Hash: PDTB6476KDCUSLHL2ADS3GDLQV2JFK5A X-MailFrom: l.leahu-vladucu@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thanks for working on this! This is certainly something that quite a few people have asked for over time. For reference: - this has been asked for on our forum [0] - this patch fixes issue #7223 - see [1] [0] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/memtest86.163802/ [1] https://bugzilla.proxmox.com/show_bug.cgi?id=7223 On 25.02.26 19:37, Stoiko Ivanov wrote: > memtest86+ ships a config-snippet for grub configuration, and is thus > present on installations using grub (although currently not functional > when secure-boot is enabled). > > adding an equivalent entry for memtest86+ on systemd-booted systems > seems like an improvment and a step to having similar functionality in > our different boot-loader setups. > > Tested by installing proxmox-kernel-helper with this patch and running > proxmox-boot-tool reinit, followed by rebooting into memtest86+ on a > systemd-booted system. > > Suggested-by: Daniel Herzig > Signed-off-by: Stoiko Ivanov > --- > not 100% sure if it's worth adding, but both Daniel and I thought this might > exist and I remember missing it once on a host of mine > > src/bin/proxmox-boot-tool | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/bin/proxmox-boot-tool b/src/bin/proxmox-boot-tool > index 95d699d..b785c7d 100755 > --- a/src/bin/proxmox-boot-tool > +++ b/src/bin/proxmox-boot-tool > @@ -196,6 +196,17 @@ init_bootloader() { > echo "timeout 3" > "$esp_mp/$PMX_LOADER_CONF.tmp" > echo "default proxmox-*" >> "$esp_mp/$PMX_LOADER_CONF.tmp" > mv "$esp_mp/$PMX_LOADER_CONF.tmp" "$esp_mp/$PMX_LOADER_CONF" > + memtest=memtest86+x64.efi > + memtest_conf="$esp_mp/loader/entries/$memtest.conf" > + if [ -f "/boot/$memtest" ]; then > + echo "Adding $memtest .." > + cp "/boot/$memtest" "$esp_mp/EFI/" > + cat > "$memtest_conf.tmp" <<- EOF > + title Memory test ($memtest) > + efi /EFI/$memtest > + EOF > + mv "$memtest_conf.tmp" "$memtest_conf" > + fi > fi > else > echo "Installing grub i386-pc target.."