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

OCPBUGS-45928: OCPBUGS-46531: crio: drop crun subcgroup #4774

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

haircommander
Copy link
Member

historically crun has run with a subcgroup to allow it to own the cgroup configuration of a container this is more idiomatic with systemd's single owner rule.

The problem is the subcgroup means there is an extra cgroup for cadvisor to read metrics for, so moving to crun by default actually increases cpu usage. Dropping the subcgroup (with a new cri-o knob and this annotation) fixes this regression.

This reverts commit 9e8ecf4, which was a revert of the original commit. CRI-O has now been fixed to not panic when this field is set.

historically crun has run with a subcgroup to allow it to own the cgroup configuration of a container
this is more idiomatic with systemd's single owner rule.

The problem is the subcgroup means there is an extra cgroup for cadvisor to read metrics for, so
moving to crun by default actually increases cpu usage. Dropping the subcgroup (with a new cri-o knob and
this annotation) fixes this regression.

This reverts commit 9e8ecf4, which was a revert of the original commit.
CRI-O has now been fixed to not panic when this field is set.

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>
@haircommander
Copy link
Member Author

#4770 #4765 for posterity

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 6, 2025
@haircommander
Copy link
Member Author

/payload

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 6, 2025

@haircommander: it appears that you have attempted to use some version of the payload command, but your comment was incorrectly formatted and cannot be acted upon. See the docs for usage info.

@haircommander
Copy link
Member Author

/payload 4.19 blocking

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/payload-aggregate periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade 10

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 6, 2025

@sohankunkerkar: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command

  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/40b85250-cc56-11ef-88f7-0f7917b80924-0

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/retest

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/retitle OCPBUGS-45928: OCPBUGS-46531: crio: drop crun subcgroup

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot changed the title Reapply "crio: drop crun subcgroup" OCPBUGS-45928: OCPBUGS-46531: crio: drop crun subcgroup Jan 7, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 7, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@haircommander: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-45928, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to be open, but it isn't
  • expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, POST, but it is Closed (Done) instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

historically crun has run with a subcgroup to allow it to own the cgroup configuration of a container this is more idiomatic with systemd's single owner rule.

The problem is the subcgroup means there is an extra cgroup for cadvisor to read metrics for, so moving to crun by default actually increases cpu usage. Dropping the subcgroup (with a new cri-o knob and this annotation) fixes this regression.

This reverts commit 9e8ecf4, which was a revert of the original commit. CRI-O has now been fixed to not panic when this field is set.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/jira refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sohankunkerkar: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-45928, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, POST, but it is MODIFIED instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/jira refresh

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 7, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sohankunkerkar: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-45928, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

In response to this:

/jira refresh

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

/payload 4.19 nightly blocking
/payload 4.19 ci blocking

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 7, 2025

@sohankunkerkar: trigger 14 job(s) of type blocking for the nightly release of OCP 4.19

  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-aws-upgrade-ovn-single-node
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-gcp-ovn-rt-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn-conformance
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-serial
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-fips-payload-scan
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-bm
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6
  • periodic-ci-openshift-microshift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn-ocp-conformance
  • periodic-ci-openshift-microshift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn-ocp-conformance-serial
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-e2e-rosa-sts-ovn

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/9f7e78c0-ccfe-11ef-8613-f6427d562f26-0

trigger 4 job(s) of type blocking for the ci release of OCP 4.19

  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/9f7e78c0-ccfe-11ef-8613-f6427d562f26-1

Copy link
Member

@sohankunkerkar sohankunkerkar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/hold
we need to check the status of blocking jobs before merging this change.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 7, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 7, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 7, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: haircommander, sohankunkerkar

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

@sohankunkerkar
Copy link
Member

@stbenjam could you take a look at it?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants