vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104528

kolyshkin · 2021-08-23T21:03:07Z

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

This bumps runc to 1.0.2. For the complete release notes, see https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/releases/tag/v1.0.2

In particular, this fixes the check cgroup v1 systemd manager check
if a container needs to be frozen before Set(), and adds a knob to
skip the check/freeze entirely (used from this PR).

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #104280

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Fixes a regression in 1.22 with occasional pod cgroup freeze when using cgroup v1 and systemd driver.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

None

For the complete release notes, see - https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/releases/tag/v1.0.2 In particular, this fixes the check cgroup v1 systemd manager check if a container needs to be frozen before Set(), and adds a knob to skip the check/freeze entirely (to be used by the next commit). Signed-off-by: Kir Kolyshkin <kolyshkin@gmail.com>

This is a knob added by runc 1.0.2 specifically for kubernetes, which tells runc/libcontainer/cgroups/systemd v1 manager to not freeze the cgroup in Set(). We set this knob here because this code is only used for pods (rather than containers) management, and in this place we create or update the pod cgroup with no device limits set, so we can skip the freeze. If this knob is not set, libcontainer's cgroup v1 manager tries to figure out whether the freeze is needed or not, but it's a somewhat expensive check to perform, thus the knob is a shortcut. Signed-off-by: Kir Kolyshkin <kolyshkin@gmail.com>

k8s-ci-robot · 2021-08-23T21:03:16Z

Hi @kolyshkin. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

kolyshkin · 2021-08-23T21:03:39Z

@odinuge @liggitt @ehashman PTAL

mrunalp · 2021-08-23T22:41:03Z

/ok-to-test

mrunalp · 2021-08-24T15:12:11Z

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

harche · 2021-08-24T16:07:28Z

/pull pull-kubernetes-node-crio-e2e

harche · 2021-08-24T16:10:14Z

/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-e2e

liggitt · 2021-08-24T16:23:13Z

pkg/kubelet/cm/cgroup_manager_linux.go

@@ -379,7 +379,8 @@ func getSupportedUnifiedControllers() sets.String {

 func (m *cgroupManagerImpl) toResources(resourceConfig *ResourceConfig) *libcontainerconfigs.Resources {
 	resources := &libcontainerconfigs.Resources{
-		SkipDevices: true,
+		SkipDevices:     true,
+		SkipFreezeOnSet: true,


we also set up libcontainerconfigs.Resources and set SkipDevices: true in these places:

kubernetes/pkg/kubelet/cm/container_manager_linux.go

Lines 397 to 399 in b40d9e8

Resources: &configs.Resources{

SkipDevices: true,

},

kubernetes/pkg/kubelet/dockershim/cm/container_manager_linux.go

Lines 125 to 129 in b40d9e8

Resources: &configs.Resources{

Memory: int64(memoryLimit),

MemorySwap: -1,

SkipDevices: true,

},

should those set this new option as well?

No (I should have explained it earlier but didn't know where to).

The reason is, SkipFreezeOnSet only makes sense for systemd v1 manager, and is ignored otherwise. In these two places you quoted we use fs[2] manager, i.e. no systemd involved.

In other words, it wouldn't hurt to set it, but it's useless (and may be misleading for those who read the code later).

harche · 2021-08-24T16:32:58Z

/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-cgrpv2-e2e

harche · 2021-08-24T17:07:31Z

/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-e2e

harche · 2021-08-24T17:07:50Z

/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-cgrpv2-e2e

liggitt · 2021-08-24T19:19:58Z

ok

/approve
for dependency updates

Will leave lgtm to node reviewer. Is it expected that CI job is failing?

k8s-ci-robot · 2021-08-24T19:25:36Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kolyshkin, liggitt

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [liggitt]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

odinuge · 2021-08-24T19:40:08Z

/lgtm
/priority critical-urgent
/triage accepted

This needs a release note tho, so holding for that.
/hold

Is it expected that CI job is failing?

Hmm. Looks like it is flaking.. Strange. It is however running on cgroup v2, and that is still "experimenta" since we doesn't have any good CI signals for it.

/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-cgrpv2-e2e

And some others, just to check:

/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv1
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv2
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial

k8s-ci-robot · 2021-08-24T22:55:29Z

@kolyshkin: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-node-crio-cgrpv2-e2e	`c06a851`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-crio-cgrpv2-e2e`
pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv1	`c06a851`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv1`
pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv2	`c06a851`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-crio-cgroupv2`
pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd	`c06a851`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd`
pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial	`c06a851`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

mrunalp · 2021-08-24T23:47:28Z

The crio cgroups v2 test failure is a known problem. @harche Did we have an issue for it?

harche · 2021-08-25T05:43:59Z

The crio cgroups v2 test failure is a known problem. @harche Did we have an issue for it?

cgroups v1 flaking - #104568
cgroups v2 failing - #104567

rphillips · 2021-08-25T23:30:34Z

release note added
/hold cancel

kolyshkin added 2 commits August 23, 2021 13:05

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. label Aug 23, 2021

k8s-ci-robot requested review from logicalhan, resouer and a team August 23, 2021 21:03

k8s-ci-robot added area/kubelet sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Aug 23, 2021

This was referenced Aug 23, 2021

[1.22] vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104529

Merged

[1.21] bump runc to 1.0.2 #104530

Merged

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 23, 2021

liggitt reviewed Aug 24, 2021

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot assigned odinuge Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Aug 25, 2021

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 25, 2021

k8s-ci-robot merged commit cbd0611 into kubernetes:master Aug 26, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.23 milestone Aug 26, 2021

liggitt added the kind/regression Categorizes issue or PR as related to a regression from a prior release. label Apr 27, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104528

vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104528

kolyshkin commented Aug 23, 2021 •

edited by liggitt

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 23, 2021

kolyshkin commented Aug 23, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 23, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

liggitt Aug 24, 2021

kolyshkin Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

liggitt commented Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 24, 2021

odinuge commented Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 24, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 25, 2021

rphillips commented Aug 25, 2021

	Resources: &configs.Resources{
	Memory: int64(memoryLimit),
	MemorySwap: -1,
	SkipDevices: true,
	},

vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104528

vendor: bump runc to 1.0.2 #104528

Conversation

kolyshkin commented Aug 23, 2021 • edited by liggitt

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 23, 2021

kolyshkin commented Aug 23, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 23, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

liggitt Aug 24, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kolyshkin Aug 24, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 24, 2021

liggitt commented Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 24, 2021

odinuge commented Aug 24, 2021

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 24, 2021

mrunalp commented Aug 24, 2021

harche commented Aug 25, 2021

rphillips commented Aug 25, 2021

kolyshkin commented Aug 23, 2021 •

edited by liggitt