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

Add default ulimit test for gen kube #18733

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 5, 2023

Conversation

umohnani8
Copy link
Member

@umohnani8 umohnani8 commented May 30, 2023

Add a test for generate kube to verify that the ulimit
annotation is not set for the default case when the user
doesn't set any ulimits.

Fixes #18555
Implementation was done in #18721 and this PR adds a regression test.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

None

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 30, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: umohnani8

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 30, 2023
Copy link
Member

@Luap99 Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the current way of setting default ulimits is just broken, see #18714 and #18696.
Instead of keeping this it is IMO better to move setting the default limits down in libpod and set it on each start. Then we do not alter ctr.config.Spec which means your kube generate code can just stay as it without changes.

libpod/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Luap99
Copy link
Member

Luap99 commented May 31, 2023

@umohnani8 I think if we merge #18721 then you do not need any code changes at all, you could just add your test to prevent future regressions.

@umohnani8 umohnani8 changed the title Get the default ulimits correctly for kube gen [WIP] Get the default ulimits correctly for kube gen May 31, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 31, 2023
Add a test for generate kube to verify that the ulimit
annotation is not set for the default case when the user
doesn't set any ulimits.

Signed-off-by: Urvashi Mohnani <[email protected]>
@umohnani8 umohnani8 changed the title [WIP] Get the default ulimits correctly for kube gen Add default ulimit test for gen kube Jun 2, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 2, 2023
@umohnani8
Copy link
Member Author

@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL

@baude
Copy link
Member

baude commented Jun 5, 2023

im taking comments from @Luap99 to indicate his LGTM

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 5, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 99a8e94 into containers:main Jun 5, 2023
@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 4, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 4, 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. release-note-none
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Podman fails to start containers due to RLIMIT_NPROC being too high
4 participants