V7 test-in-container patch
Florian Weimer
fweimer@redhat.com
Thu Aug 16 07:59:00 GMT 2018
On 08/16/2018 01:57 AM, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> Hurd doesn't have unshare, so you need to avoid building the container
>> framework there.
>
> Is it OK to return UNSUPPORTED for those? I don't think it makes sense
> to try to work around the whole containerized-test setup if containers
> are missing.
UNSUPPORTED would work there. If the Hurd maintainers do not like it,
we could probably filter out test-containers tests there.
>> The Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 kernel doesn't seem to like this
>> combination of flags, even as root:
>>
>> unshare(CLONE_NEWNS|CLONE_NEWUSER|CLONE_NEWPID) = -1 EINVAL (Invalid
>> argument)
>>
>> Is CLONE_NEWPID really required?
>
> Yes. You can't mount /proc without it. Don't ask me why ;-)
Can you perform a bind mount of the existing /proc instead? Maybe you
can drop the CLONE_NEWPID this way.
If the bind mount doesn't work, I suggest to ask internally what our
kernel needs to get this working.
>> My concern about the over-use of FAIL_UNSUPPORTED and the UNSUPPORTED
>> test status in the container framework remains. Sure, there are some
>> things that can fail due to missing host support, but e.g. a fork file
>> shouldn't lead to UNSUPPORTED, but FAIL.
>
> I replaced them all with FAILs. I was trying to keep "failure of the
> test" separate from "failure of the test harness" but I'm OK with it
> either way.
It's hard to draw a line. Fork failures in particular tend to leak
between tests because of kernel bugs (still unfixed upstream,
unfortunately).
Thanks,
Florian
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list