Skip to content

Per container runtime binary#1454

Merged
estesp merged 3 commits intocontainerd:masterfrom
mlaventure:per-container-runtime-binary
Sep 1, 2017
Merged

Per container runtime binary#1454
estesp merged 3 commits intocontainerd:masterfrom
mlaventure:per-container-runtime-binary

Conversation

@mlaventure
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@crosbymichael I ended up adding an option to the shim for each on in RuncOptions, may get out of hand, but didn't want to add a config file for it.

We could always serialize the whole struct in one cli option otherwise 😇

Comment thread linux/runtime.go Outdated
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can we put these in a struct together for the shim and runtime opts?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What do you mean?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just so we don't have all these fields on the Runtime struct, just for grouping, not anything functional

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I see.

Sure, will update

@mlaventure mlaventure force-pushed the per-container-runtime-binary branch from 02967ea to 2e2f10a Compare August 31, 2017 21:21
This also fix the type used for RuncOptions.SystemCgroup, hence introducing
an API break.

Signed-off-by: Kenfe-Mickael Laventure <[email protected]>
This allow specifying wher the OCI runtime should store its state data.

Signed-off-by: Kenfe-Mickael Laventure <[email protected]>
@mlaventure mlaventure force-pushed the per-container-runtime-binary branch from 2e2f10a to 1b79170 Compare August 31, 2017 21:35
@codecov-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

Merging #1454 into master will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1454      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage    40.8%   40.82%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          23       23              
  Lines        2924     2920       -4     
==========================================
- Hits         1193     1192       -1     
+ Misses       1453     1451       -2     
+ Partials      278      277       -1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
metadata/containers.go 47.2% <0%> (+0.34%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 22df20b...1b79170. Read the comment docs.

@crosbymichael
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

LGTM

I'm not a fan of more flags on the shim but I cannot think of a better way to pass this data ;)

@mlaventure
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@estesp do you mind having a quick look? 😇

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@estesp estesp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

One random question about criu path flag that I think I answered myself via code inspection.

},
cli.StringFlag{
Name: "criu,c",
Usage: "path to criu",
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess it's ok to not have a default as, if I followed the code through, an empty/unset value will just not set the flag on runc leaving it up to runc to use a default in the case of checkpoint/restore actions. Is that correct? Any value in having the default here versus there? I'm thinking it doesn't matter as we weren't setting the criu binary path before.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

go-runc ignores the flag if it's empty meaning that runc will use its default. But you gave me a doubt for a few seconds :)

So, yes, I'd rather defer to the default built in runc

@estesp estesp merged commit 4291fb4 into containerd:master Sep 1, 2017
@mlaventure mlaventure deleted the per-container-runtime-binary branch September 1, 2017 17:27
mauriciovasquezbernal pushed a commit to kinvolk/containerd that referenced this pull request Nov 13, 2020
…ion-for-make

use project dco test locally
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