Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Backports for v3.2.0-RC3 #10461

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
May 26, 2021
Merged

Conversation

mheon
Copy link
Member

@mheon mheon commented May 25, 2021

Backports and release notes updates for v3.2.0-RC3

rhatdan and others added 13 commits May 25, 2021 14:44
When attempting to copy files into and out of running containers
within the host pidnamespace, the code was attempting to join the
host pidns again, and getting an error. This was causing the podman
cp command to fail. Since we are already in the host pid namespace,
we should not be attempting to join.  This PR adds a check to see if
the container is in NOT host pid namespace, and only then attempts to
join.

Fixes: containers#9985

Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <[email protected]>
A conversation on the customer portal suggests that to add an extra note
about the requirement of XDG_RUNTIME_DIR to be set.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <[email protected]>
libimage now supports events which `libpod.Runtime` now uses for image
events.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <[email protected]>

<MH: Removed vendor bits, kept other changes>

Signed-off-by: Matthew Heon <[email protected]>
[NO TESTS NEEDED]

* Log the routing table output at Trace vs. Debug level. Reduce noise
  in debugging output.
* Tweak SDNotify message to report Warn when it fails. Previously
  failures were silent.

Signed-off-by: Jhon Honce <[email protected]>
We have race conditions where a container can be removed
by two different processes when running podman --remove rm.

It can be cleaned up in the API or by the conmon executing
podman container cleanup.

When we fail to remove a container that does not exists we should
not be printing errors or warnings, we should just debug the fact.

[NO TESTS NEEDED] Since this is a race condition it is difficult to
test.

Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <[email protected]>
ErrOCIRuntimeNotFound error is misleading. Try to make it more
understandable to the user that the OCI Runtime IE crun or runc is not
missing, but the command they attempted to run within the container is
missing.

[NO TESTS NEEDED] Regular tests should handle this.

Fixes: containers#10432

Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <[email protected]>
Point to containers-certs.d(5) for details on the default paths, the
lookup logic and the structure of these directories.  Previously, the
man pages stated that the default path would be in `/etc/containers/...`
which is not entirely and a red herring for users (see containers#10116).

Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <[email protected]>
All of the tests has an assumption that RunLsContainer and RunLsContainerInPod completes
the container before returning.  But since the container is running
in back ground mode, the container could be still running before tools
attempt to remove it. Removing the "-d" from the command fixes the
container to match the assumption.

Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <[email protected]>
Make sure all containers exit after start

There is a race condition in that container could still be running when
we attempt to remove them.

Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 25, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mheon

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 25, 2021
@baude
Copy link
Member

baude commented May 25, 2021

/hold
/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 25, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 25, 2021
@Luap99
Copy link
Member

Luap99 commented May 25, 2021

@mheon If you have to repush, could you add #10408 please.

@mheon
Copy link
Member Author

mheon commented May 25, 2021

@Luap99 Don't think it will make this RC but I can definitely get it in the final 3.2.0 release

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented May 25, 2021

And we are stuck on the flake from hell.

@mheon
Copy link
Member Author

mheon commented May 25, 2021

Restarted again

@mheon
Copy link
Member Author

mheon commented May 26, 2021

On restart 5 of the flaked test.

@mheon
Copy link
Member Author

mheon commented May 26, 2021

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 26, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit a5a2416 into containers:v3.2 May 26, 2021
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 23, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 23, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants