Re: [PATCH 4/4] lxc: Let the driver detect CGroups earlier

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 04:15:18PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
This is the bug I'm facing. I deliberately configured a container
so that the source of a <filesystem/> to passthrough doesn't
exist. The start fails with:

 lxcContainerPivotRoot:669 : Failed to create /non-existent/path/.oldroot: Permission denied

which is expected. But what is NOT expected is that CGroup
hierarchy is left behind. This is because the controller sets up
the CGroup hierarchy, user namespace, moves interfaces, etc. and
finally checks whether container setup (done in a separate
process) succeeded. Only after all this the error is propagated
to the LXC driver. The driver aborts the startup and tries to
perform the cleanup, but this is missing CGroups because those
weren't detected yet.

Ideally, whenever a function fails, it tries to unroll back so
that is has no artifacts left behind (look at all those frees/FD
closes/etc. at end of functions). But with CGroups it is
different - the controller process can't clean up after itself,
because it is still running inside that CGroup.

Therefore, what we have to do is to let the driver detect CGroups
as soon as they are created, and proceed with controller
execution only after that.

Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
src/lxc/lxc_controller.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
src/lxc/lxc_process.c    | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


[...]

diff --git a/src/lxc/lxc_process.c b/src/lxc/lxc_process.c
index 493e19f03d..55e74e913b 100644
--- a/src/lxc/lxc_process.c
+++ b/src/lxc/lxc_process.c
@@ -1473,6 +1473,7 @@ int virLXCProcessStart(virConnectPtr conn,
    if (g_atomic_int_add(&driver->nactive, 1) == 0 && driver->inhibitCallback)
        driver->inhibitCallback(true, driver->inhibitOpaque);

+    /* The first synchronization point is when the controller creates CGroups. */
    if (lxcContainerWaitForContinue(handshakefds[0]) < 0) {
        char out[1024];

@@ -1504,6 +1505,25 @@ int virLXCProcessStart(virConnectPtr conn,
        goto cleanup;
    }

+    if (lxcContainerSendContinue(handshakefds[3]) < 0) {
+        virReportSystemError(errno, "%s",
+                             _("Failed to send continue signal to controller"));
+        goto cleanup;
+    }
+
+    /* The second synchronization point is when the controller finished
+     * creating the container. */
+    if (lxcContainerWaitForContinue(handshakefds[0]) < 0) {
+        char out[1024];
+
+        if (!(virLXCProcessReadLogOutput(vm, logfile, pos, out, 1024) < 0)) {
+            virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
+                           _("guest failed to start: %s"), out);

It would be nice to differentiate the error message reported here to the
one reported originally handful of lines above.  Just for the sake of
future debugging.

Other than that the patches could be nicer to read if the variables were
split or named differently, but after reading through a lot of the code
around these parts I see that such a request would be unreasonable for
this patch.  Maybe a rewrite of the signalling could be an item for a
TODO list, although I am not sure what would be the best way to handle
this.  Can we use for example eventfd()s?  Would that help us at all?

Anyway, with one of the error messages tweaked a bit:

Reviewed-by: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@xxxxxxxxxx>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux