Repository navigation
runsc: return the lock error in Container.Update - #15632
Merged
copybara-service[bot] merged 1 commit intoOct 12, 2026
Merged
copybara-service[bot] merged 1 commit into
copybara-service[bot] merged 1 commit into
Conversation
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
Container.Update ignored the error from c.Saver.lock(BlockAcquire). If the state file lock cannot be acquired, the deferred c.Saver.unlock() panics with "unlock called without lock held", so "runsc update" crashes instead of reporting the error. Check the error like the other lock call sites in this file. Assisted-by: Claude Code
LemonCondor
force-pushed
the
runsc-update-check-lock-error
branch
from
October 10, 2026 13:31
f33a405 to
4a8a3ac
Compare
EtiennePerot
approved these changes
Oct 10, 2026
copybara-service Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2026
`Container.Update` ignores the error returned by `c.Saver.lock(BlockAcquire)`. When the state file lock cannot be acquired, the deferred `c.Saver.unlock()` then panics with `unlock called without lock held`, so `runsc update` crashes instead of returning the error. This checks the error the same way the other `c.Saver.lock(BlockAcquire)` call sites in `container.go` already do. Testing: reproduced with a throwaway unit test (a `Container` whose `Saver.RootDir` does not exist, non-root container so the cgroup path is skipped): before this change `Update` panics with `unlock called without lock held`; after it, `Update` returns the lock error. `go vet ./runsc/container/` is clean. The regression test is not included because the tests in this package are Bazel integration tests that need root and a runsc binary, which I could not run here. This change was prepared with AI assistance (Claude Code) and reviewed by me before submission. FUTURE_COPYBARA_INTEGRATE_REVIEW=#15632 from LemonCondor:runsc-update-check-lock-error 4a8a3ac PiperOrigin-RevId: 997202195
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Container.Updateignores the error returned byc.Saver.lock(BlockAcquire). When the state file lock cannot be acquired, the deferredc.Saver.unlock()then panics withunlock called without lock held, sorunsc updatecrashes instead of returning the error.This checks the error the same way the other
c.Saver.lock(BlockAcquire)call sites incontainer.goalready do.Testing: reproduced with a throwaway unit test (a
ContainerwhoseSaver.RootDirdoes not exist, non-root container so the cgroup path is skipped): before this changeUpdatepanics withunlock called without lock held; after it,Updatereturns the lock error.go vet ./runsc/container/is clean. The regression test is not included because the tests in this package are Bazel integration tests that need root and a runsc binary, which I could not run here.This change was prepared with AI assistance (Claude Code) and reviewed by me before submission.