I asked Peter additional questions in bugzilla.

BetaBlocker +1

From what Peter says, it sounds like it renders certain hardware configurations unbootable.

BetaBlocker +1

My understanding is that affected devices can boot, but will not have a TPM device detected. Of course, if you use TPM to auto-unlock the disks, then they will obviously not boot. But comments from @pbrobinson seem to imply that boot is broken completely on some devices. So if that's what he really meant and if he's correct, it would make sense to consider a blocker (beta or final).

BetaBlocker +1

BetaBlocker +1

AGREED AcceptedBetaBlocker

The following votes have been closed:

• Accepted BetaBlocker (+4, 0, -0)
  • +1 by bcotton, nixuser, lruzicka, geraldosimiao

Here's a thought. This kernel regression is already pushed to stable releases (F37, F38), so all our users already suffer from it. We know that kernel developers are aware of it and intend to fix it soon. Does it really make sense to block Beta with this? What benefit does it bring us, when all our users are already affected by this? I can understand we want F39 Final to work in the future, but I'm not convinced the Beta blocker makes sense here.

There would be some justification if some boards really failed to boot (so far I've only seen reports of a broken suspend or when unlocking luks from tpm, though), because those couldn't be tested with Beta, which is more publicized than our nightlies. That's all I can think of. We can have that documented in Common Issues, though.

Release F39 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.