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

Skip checkpoint/restore tests on Fedora for now #2461

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2019

Conversation

adrianreber
Copy link
Collaborator

There is currently still one SELinux related checkpoint/restore problem:
#2334

To avoid unnecessary CI failures the checkpoint/restore tests are
temporarily disabled on Fedora.

It is not necessary to disable the tests on Ubuntu as it is running
without SELinux and it is also not necessary to disable the RHEL 7 tests
as RHEL's CRIU is too old to run the checkpoint/restore tests at all.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Reber areber@redhat.com

@adrianreber
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This tries to help with #2435

CC: @cevich

@vrothberg
Copy link
Member

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: adrianreber, vrothberg

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-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 27, 2019
@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Feb 27, 2019

LGTM

@giuseppe
Copy link
Member

I've been playing with the tests suite and the checkpoint/restore tests. It would be nice to keep a whitelist of OCI runtimes that support the feature. It is not part of the OCI specs, although runc supports it.

@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Feb 27, 2019

@giuseppe Maybe this is something we can add to libpod.conf - whether a given runtime includes support for non-standard features like checkpoint/restore?

@adrianreber
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@giuseppe good point. Not sure how it could look like. Something like if basename(r.path) == "runc" does not sound like the best idea. Especially as a checkpoint is done by directly calling runc and a restore is done through conmon. So maybe something globally which tells Podman that special features (like checkpoint/restore) are not part of the current OCI runtime.

There is currently still one SELinux related checkpoint/restore problem:
containers#2334

To avoid unnecessary CI failures the checkpoint/restore tests are
temporarily disabled on Fedora.

It is not necessary to disable the tests on Ubuntu as it is running
without SELinux and it is also not necessary to disable the RHEL 7 tests
as RHEL's CRIU is too old to run the checkpoint/restore tests at all.

Signed-off-by: Adrian Reber <areber@redhat.com>
@cevich
Copy link
Member

cevich commented Feb 27, 2019

(this should also help with #1936 )

@cevich
Copy link
Member

cevich commented Feb 27, 2019

That's an odd test to fail on only Ubuntu podman run n user created network namespace with resolv.conf

Output shows:

Loaded image(s): docker.io/library/busybox:latest
Running: /var/tmp/go/src/github.com/containers/libpod/bin/podman --root /tmp/podman_test455853544/crio --runroot /tmp/podman_test455853544/crio-run --runtime /usr/bin/runc --conmon /usr/libexec/podman/conmon --cni-config-dir /etc/cni/net.d --cgroup-manager cgroupfs --storage-driver vfs run --net ns:/run/netns/xxx docker.io/library/alpine:latest cat /etc/resolv.conf
bash: /etc/netns/xxx/resolv.conf: No such file or directory
search c.SECRET.internal google.internal
nameserver 127.0.0.53
options edns0

Looking at test code...

@cevich
Copy link
Member

cevich commented Feb 27, 2019

(code test/e2e/run_networking_test.go:193)

I really can't understand how that could fail, the test before it passed fine. Unless (somehow) one of those SystemExec broke but didn't report. Re-running the test on ubuntu, hoping it's a flake.

@giuseppe
Copy link
Member

@giuseppe Maybe this is something we can add to libpod.conf - whether a given runtime includes support for non-standard features like checkpoint/restore?

I think for the tests we could simply do something like:

$OCI_RUNTIME checkpoint --help > /dev/null 2>&1

if it fails then the OCI runtime doesn't support checkpoint/restore

@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Feb 27, 2019

Also works fine - I'd be fine doing that probe to check runtime capabilities

@cevich
Copy link
Member

cevich commented Feb 28, 2019

@adrianreber okay, looks like the test-failure is a race condition. I learned that others are seeing it as well. Pretty sure #2481 (or similar) should address it. Until that merges, we can just smash the re-test button until it passes 😕

@cevich
Copy link
Member

cevich commented Feb 28, 2019

There...tests all green now.

@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Feb 28, 2019

Code LGTM

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Feb 28, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 03b236a into containers:master Feb 28, 2019
@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 27, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 27, 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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants