[v4.4] fix --health-on-failure=restart in transient unit #17862
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As described in containers#17777, the `restart` on-failure action did not behave correctly when the health check is being run by a transient systemd unit. It ran just fine when being executed outside such a unit, for instance, manually or, as done in the system tests, in a scripted fashion. There were two issue causing the `restart` on-failure action to misbehave: 1) The transient systemd units used the default `KillMode=cgroup` which will nuke all processes in the specific cgroup including the recently restarted container/conmon once the main `podman healthcheck run` process exits. 2) Podman attempted to remove the transient systemd unit and timer during restart. That is perfectly fine when manually restarting the container but not when the restart itself is being executed inside such a transient unit. Ultimately, Podman tried to shoot itself in the foot. Fix both issues by moving the restart logic in the cleanup process. Instead of restarting the container, the `healthcheck run` will just stop the container and the cleanup process will restart the container once it has turned unhealthy. Backport of commit 9563415. Fixes: containers#17777 Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <vrothberg@redhat.com>
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: vrothberg 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 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
/lgtm |
This was referenced Mar 29, 2023
github-actions
bot
added
the
locked - please file new issue/PR
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As described in #17777, the
restarton-failure action did not behave correctly when the health check is being run by a transient systemd unit. It ran just fine when being executed outside such a unit, for instance, manually or, as done in the system tests, in a scripted fashion.There were two issue causing the
restarton-failure action to misbehave:The transient systemd units used the default
KillMode=cgroupwhichwill nuke all processes in the specific cgroup including the recently
restarted container/conmon once the main
podman healthcheck runprocess exits.
Podman attempted to remove the transient systemd unit and timer
during restart. That is perfectly fine when manually restarting the
container but not when the restart itself is being executed inside
such a transient unit. Ultimately, Podman tried to shoot itself in
the foot.
Fix both issues by moving the restart logic in the cleanup process. Instead of restarting the container, the
healthcheck runwill just stop the container and the cleanup process will restart the container once it has turned unhealthy.Backport of commit 9563415.
Fixes: #17777
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?