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

libcontainer: intelrdt: fix null intelrdt path issue in Destroy() #1955

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 1, 2019

Conversation

xiaochenshen
Copy link
Contributor

@xiaochenshen xiaochenshen commented Jan 4, 2019

This patch fixes a corner case when destroy a container:

If we start a container without 'intelRdt' config set, and then we run
“runc update --l3-cache-schema/--mem-bw-schema” to add 'intelRdt' config
implicitly.

Now if we enter "exit" from the container inside, we will pass through
linuxContainer.Destroy() -> state.destroy() -> intelRdtManager.Destroy().
But in IntelRdtManager.Destroy(), IntelRdtManager.Path is still null
string, it hasn’t been initialized yet. As a result, the created rdt
group directory during "runc update" will not be removed as expected.

Signed-off-by: Xiaochen Shen xiaochen.shen@intel.com

@xiaochenshen xiaochenshen force-pushed the rdt-fix-destroy-issue branch from 97a1a0c to acb75d0 Compare January 4, 2019 16:24
This patch fixes a corner case when destroy a container:

If we start a container without 'intelRdt' config set, and then we run
“runc update --l3-cache-schema/--mem-bw-schema” to add 'intelRdt' config
implicitly.

Now if we enter "exit" from the container inside, we will pass through
linuxContainer.Destroy() -> state.destroy() -> intelRdtManager.Destroy().
But in IntelRdtManager.Destroy(), IntelRdtManager.Path is still null
string, it hasn’t been initialized yet. As a result, the created rdt
group directory during "runc update" will not be removed as expected.

Signed-off-by: Xiaochen Shen <xiaochen.shen@intel.com>
@crosbymichael
Copy link
Member

crosbymichael commented Jan 15, 2019

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

1 similar comment
@mrunalp
Copy link
Contributor

mrunalp commented Feb 1, 2019

LGTM

Approved with PullApprove

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