Skip to content

Bump to opencontainers/runc new version - v1.0.0-rc10#3973

Merged
estesp merged 1 commit into
containerd:masterfrom
dims:update-to-new-rc10-of-opencontainers/runc
Jan 25, 2020
Merged

Bump to opencontainers/runc new version - v1.0.0-rc10#3973
estesp merged 1 commit into
containerd:masterfrom
dims:update-to-new-rc10-of-opencontainers/runc

Conversation

@dims

@dims dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

We have a new release of runc ( opencontainers/runc#2217 ). This release
has a fix for a race condition we are struggling with in kubernetes
(especially CI jobs) which was fixed in opencontainers/runc#2185

The v1.0.0-rc10 includes the fix for CVE-2019-16884 as well. The full
diff upstream is here:
opencontainers/runc@v1.0.0-rc9...v1.0.0-rc10

Signed-off-by: Davanum Srinivas <[email protected]>

@liggitt

liggitt commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@theopenlab-ci

theopenlab-ci Bot commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Build succeeded.

@liggitt

liggitt commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

e.g. with make vendor

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.

This change needs to be committed to https://github.com/containerd/cri and then revendored into this repo

@thaJeztah

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Perhaps the commit message should contain some details about the changes, as this update of runc includes opencontainers/runc#2207, which fixes: CVE-2019-19921 (as reported in opencontainers/runc#2197)

Given; that fix is in the binary not in the vendored code, but the version in vendor.conf is currently used as the source of truth for what version or runc should be installed/used/packaged.

Are there other notable changes? This is the full diff upstream; opencontainers/runc@v1.0.0-rc9...v1.0.0-rc10

@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@liggitt @AkihiroSuda the CRI PR is here - containerd/cri#1383.

looks like we have another problem with containerd/containerd <-> containerd/cri <-> k8s.io loop because of how we do staging for cri-api in kubernetes/kubernetes

@dims
dims force-pushed the update-to-new-rc10-of-opencontainers/runc branch from 1746787 to b6b670b Compare January 24, 2020 14:46
@theopenlab-ci

theopenlab-ci Bot commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Build succeeded.

@thaJeztah

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@dims I see you updated the PR description but the actual commit message is empty; could you update the commit message itself (so that it's included in git's history), and also mention the CVE?

@dims
dims force-pushed the update-to-new-rc10-of-opencontainers/runc branch 2 times, most recently from 4251dec to 58529a3 Compare January 24, 2020 15:13
We have a new release of runc ( opencontainers/runc#2217 ). This release
has a fix for a race condition we are struggling with in kubernetes
(especially CI jobs) which was fixed in opencontainers/runc#2185

The v1.0.0-rc10 includes the fix for CVE-2019-19921 as well. The full
diff upstream is here:
opencontainers/runc@v1.0.0-rc9...v1.0.0-rc10

Signed-off-by: Davanum Srinivas <[email protected]>
@dims
dims force-pushed the update-to-new-rc10-of-opencontainers/runc branch from 58529a3 to 923c05b Compare January 24, 2020 15:14
@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@thaJeztah yep Done!

@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@thaJeztah @mikebrow looks like i may have to update the SHA for github.com/containerd/cri in vendor.conf as well once the other PR in cri repo merges.

@theopenlab-ci

theopenlab-ci Bot commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Build succeeded.

@thaJeztah

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@dims yes, that makes sense (although it will already pick up the current version that's vendored as part of this PR, so it's ok to do in a follow up)

If you decide to do it as part of this PR, please do that update as a separate commit (so that it's easier to backport the changes individually to the release branches, which need to vendor a different branch of containerd/cri)

@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@thaJeztah will do it in a follow up.

@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@thaJeztah @mikebrow this is ready too!

@estesp estesp left a comment

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.

LGTM

@thaJeztah thaJeztah left a comment

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.

LGTM, thank you!

@mikebrow mikebrow left a comment

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.

LGTM

@mikebrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@thaJeztah @mikebrow looks like i may have to update the SHA for github.com/containerd/cri in vendor.conf as well once the other PR in cri repo merges.

yes can add another commit to pull in whatever updates are needed to merge the vendor conf to master pick up cri dependencies, for example pick up the selinux update as well .. or merging the latest containerd/cri can be done via a different PR. @dmcgowan and @Random-Liu usually do the containerd/cri -> containerd/containerd updates

@dims

dims commented Jan 24, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Ack @mikebrow, Also once this is manually merged, i'll open a cherry pick to release/1.3 branch?

@mikebrow

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

yes at least 1.3 probably also 1.2

@dims

dims commented Jan 25, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@estesp
estesp merged commit 5c72f92 into containerd:master Jan 25, 2020
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.

6 participants