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

Bump userfaultfd to 0.8.1 #4568

Closed

Conversation

vadimberezniker
Copy link

Changes

Depend on newer version of userfaultfd

Reason

UFFD support is not compatible with newer kernels as there was a new ioctl option added that the older userfaultfd version does not recognize:

[PUT /snapshot/load][400] loadSnapshotBadRequest  &{FaultMessage:Load snapshot error: Failed to restore from snapshot: Failed to load guest memory: Error creating guest memory from uffd: Failed to register memory address range with the userfaultfd object: Unrecognized ioctl flags: 284}

This was reported in bytecodealliance/userfaultfd-rs#61 and fixed in bytecodealliance/userfaultfd-rs#62

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • The description of changes is clear and encompassing.
  • Any required documentation changes (code and docs) are included in this
    PR.
  • API changes follow the Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • User-facing changes are mentioned in CHANGELOG.md.
  • All added/changed functionality is tested.
  • New TODOs link to an issue.
  • Commits meet
    contribution quality standards.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

UFFD support is not compatible with newer kernels as there was a new ioctl option added that the older userfaultfd version does not recognize:
```
[PUT /snapshot/load][400] loadSnapshotBadRequest  &{FaultMessage:Load snapshot error: Failed to restore from snapshot: Failed to load guest memory: Error creating guest memory from uffd: Failed to register memory address range with the userfaultfd object: Unrecognized ioctl flags: 284}
```

This was reported in bytecodealliance/userfaultfd-rs#61 and fixed in bytecodealliance/userfaultfd-rs#62

Signed-off-by: Vadim Berezniker <vadim@buildbuddy.io>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 22, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.14%. Comparing base (36a8d56) to head (8547c85).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4568   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.14%   82.14%           
=======================================
  Files         255      255           
  Lines       31278    31278           
=======================================
  Hits        25692    25692           
  Misses       5586     5586           
Flag Coverage Δ
4.14-c5n.metal 79.63% <ø> (ø)
4.14-c7g.metal ?
4.14-m5n.metal 79.62% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
4.14-m6a.metal 78.84% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
4.14-m6g.metal 76.69% <ø> (ø)
4.14-m6i.metal 79.61% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
4.14-m7g.metal 76.69% <ø> (ø)
5.10-c5n.metal ?
5.10-c7g.metal ?
5.10-m5n.metal ?
5.10-m6a.metal ?
5.10-m6g.metal ?
5.10-m6i.metal ?
5.10-m7g.metal ?
6.1-c5n.metal 82.14% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-c7g.metal ?
6.1-m5n.metal 82.13% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6a.metal 81.44% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6g.metal 79.46% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6i.metal 82.13% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7g.metal 79.46% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@kalyazin
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @vadimberezniker . Thanks for your contribution!

Could you do a couple of minor things:

  • Run cargo update userfaultfd@0.7.0 in order to update the Cargo.lock content and include that change as well
  • Make sure all lines in the commit message are not longer than 72 characters

@roypat
Copy link
Contributor

roypat commented Apr 23, 2024

Hi @vadimberezniker,
Thanks for your PR. It seems that dependabot also just picked up this dependency update as wlel, so I'll go ahead and close this PR as subsumed by #4578.

@roypat roypat closed this Apr 23, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants