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

generate: Drop devices and mounts #15

Closed

Conversation

wking
Copy link

@wking wking commented Dec 5, 2015

Most of these are covered by the requirements that landed in
opencontainers/runtime-spec#164, and I don't think the additional mqueue
mount is worth the space between the spec requirements and the
ocitools-generated configs. More details in the commit messages.

Since opencontainers/runtime-spec#164 (part of the v0.1.1 release [1]), Linux
runtimes are required to supply these devices and mounts.  Specifying
them explicitly in the config should have no effect, and just makes
the config longer than it needs to be.

[1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/blob/v0.1.1/config-linux.md#default-devices-and-file-systems

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Linux runtimes are not required to supply this [1,2].  We could supply
it via ocitool, but I don't think its wise to try and define two
standards (one in opencontainers/specs for what a runtime must supply,
and another here with additional stuff), because I don't see a clear
definition of something generally useful enough to go here but not in
the spec.  For example, hosts without CONFIG_POSIX_MQUEUE could be
spec-compliant but unable to perform the mqueue mount I'm removing
here.

[1]: https://github.com/opencontainers/specs/blob/v0.1.1/config-linux.md#default-devices-and-file-systems
[2]: opencontainers/runtime-spec#164

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
@mrunalp
Copy link
Owner

mrunalp commented Dec 7, 2015

@wking I don't mind merging this but will wait for runc to work with this.

@wking
Copy link
Author

wking commented Dec 7, 2015

On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:23:28PM -0800, Mrunal Patel wrote:

@wking I don't mind merging this but will wait for runc to work with
this.

No problem, although we might want to wait until
opencontainers/runc#277 is resolved, since opencontainers/runtime-spec#164 is
part of v0.1.1 but runC is now partially behind and partially ahead of
that spec release.

@philips
Copy link

philips commented Dec 23, 2015

@mrunalp I don't think we should wait for runc to catchup to the spec. We are going to be out of sync no matter what.

@wking
Copy link
Author

wking commented Jan 20, 2016

Replaced by opencontainers/runtime-tools#2.

@wking wking closed this Jan 20, 2016
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