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

Fix rootless cni netns cleanup logic and rename to rootless netns #12183

Merged

Conversation

Luap99
Copy link
Member

@Luap99 Luap99 commented Nov 5, 2021

What this PR does / why we need it:

Fix rootless cni netns cleanup logic

The check if cleanup is needed reads all container and checks if there
are running containers with bridge networking. If we do not find any we
have to cleanup the ns. However there was a problem with this because
the state is empty by default so the running check never worked.
Fortunately the was a second check which relies on the CNI files so we
still did cleanup anyway.

With netavark I noticed that this check is broken because the CNI files
were not present.

mount full XDG_RUNTIME_DIR in rootless cni ns

We should mount the full runtime directory into the namespace instead of
just the netns dir. This allows more use cases.

rename rootless cni ns to rootless netns

Since we want to use the rootless cni ns also for netavark we should
pick a more generic name. The name is now "rootless network namespace"
or short "rootless netns".

The rename might cause some issues after the update but when the
all containers are restarted or the host is rebooted it should work
correctly.

How to verify it

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

The check if cleanup is needed reads all container and checks if there
are running containers with bridge networking. If we do not find any we
have to cleanup the ns. However there was a problem with this because
the state is empty by default so the running check never worked.
Fortunately the was a second check which relies on the CNI files so we
still did cleanup anyway.

With netavark I noticed that this check is broken because the CNI files
were not present.

Signed-off-by: Paul Holzinger <pholzing@redhat.com>
We should mount the full runtime directory into the namespace instead of
just the netns dir. This allows more use cases.

Signed-off-by: Paul Holzinger <pholzing@redhat.com>
Since we want to use the rootless cni ns also for netavark we should
pick a more generic name. The name is now "rootless network namespace"
or short "rootless netns".

The rename might cause some issues after the update but when the
all containers are restarted or the host is rebooted it should work
correctly.

Signed-off-by: Paul Holzinger <pholzing@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 5, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Luap99

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 5, 2021
@Luap99
Copy link
Member Author

Luap99 commented Nov 5, 2021

@mheon PTAL

@mheon
Copy link
Member

mheon commented Nov 5, 2021

LGTM

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Nov 5, 2021

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 5, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit e826158 into containers:main Nov 5, 2021
@Luap99 Luap99 deleted the rootless-netns-cleanup branch November 5, 2021 18:01
@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 22, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 22, 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.

4 participants