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

ci: revert #4020 #4446

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 21, 2024
Merged

ci: revert #4020 #4446

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 21, 2024

Conversation

lifubang
Copy link
Member

we need (#4020) because of (#3931), at that time, we removed the bindfd logic, and the
memfd logic will use more memory than before, but we have not yet moved binary clone from
runc init to runc parent process, so we need to increase memory limit in CI.
As we have moved the runc binary clone logic from runc init to runc parent process in
(#3987), so the memory usage of binary clone will not be included in container's memory
cgroup accounting. Now we can support run a simple container with lower memory usage the
same as before.

Signed-off-by: lifubang [email protected]

Copy link
Member

@rata rata left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you please refer to commits (rather than PRs) in commit messages? It is way easier to follow this way.

Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It looks like this PR also silently reverts part of commit 3083bd4. Why?

@lifubang lifubang force-pushed the revert-4020 branch 4 times, most recently from fca2de8 to d756525 Compare October 15, 2024 22:58
@lifubang
Copy link
Member Author

It looks like this PR also silently reverts part of commit 3083bd4. Why?

Good catch, there were some conflicts need to resolve, we need to care the both commits, not just the commit in #4020.
Fixed.

Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks!

@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

Need to fix EL9 CI first (see #4455).

@lifubang
Copy link
Member Author

Need to fix EL9 CI first (see #4455).

When I re-run the failure CI, it is suddenly green now!

@kolyshkin
Copy link
Contributor

Can you please refer to commits (rather than PRs) in commit messages? It is way easier to follow this way.

@lifubang please ^^^

Copy link
Contributor

@kolyshkin kolyshkin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needs commit IDs not PRs in commit message

This reverts commit 65a1074.

We needed [1] because when we removed the bindfd logic in [2] we had not
yet moved the binary cloning logic to Go and thus it was necessary to
increase the memory limit in CI because the clone was happening after
joining the cgroup. However, [3] finally moved that code to Go and thus
the cloning is now done outside of the container's cgroup and thus is no
longer accounted as part of the container's memory usage at any point.

Now we can properly support running a simple container with lower memory
usage as we did before.

[1]: commit 65a1074 ("increase memory.max in cgroups.bats")
[2]: commit b999376 ("nsenter: cloned_binary: remove bindfd logic entirely")
[3]: commit 0e9a335 ("nsexec: migrate memfd /proc/self/exe logic to Go code")

Signed-off-by: lfbzhm <[email protected]>
[cyphar: fixed commit messages]
Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <[email protected]>
@cyphar cyphar merged commit ca45a2c into opencontainers:main Oct 21, 2024
42 checks passed
@lifubang lifubang deleted the revert-4020 branch October 21, 2024 12:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants