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

health check: ignore dependencies of transient systemd units/timers #16785

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2022

Conversation

vrothberg
Copy link
Member

When stopping the transient systemd timer/unit which powers running health checks, make sure to ignore its dependencies. It turns out that we're otherwise running into a timeout when running a container in a systemd unit and reboot.

An alternative may be to further tweak some attributes/options when creating the timer/unit via systemd-run but it seems safe to just ignore the dependencies and stop.

[NO NEW TESTS NEEDED] - we don't yet have means to test reboots.

Fixes: #14531
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg vrothberg@redhat.com

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Fix a bug where system shutdown would be delayed when running health checks on containers running in a systemd unit.

When stopping the transient systemd timer/unit which powers running
health checks, make sure to ignore its dependencies.  It turns out
that we're otherwise running into a timeout when running a container in
a systemd unit and reboot.

An alternative may be to further tweak some attributes/options when
creating the timer/unit via systemd-run but it seems safe to just ignore
the dependencies and stop.

[NO NEW TESTS NEEDED] - we don't yet have means to test reboots.

Fixes: containers#14531
Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg <vrothberg@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. release-note labels Dec 8, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 8, 2022

[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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 8, 2022
@vrothberg vrothberg marked this pull request as ready for review December 8, 2022 16:09
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 8, 2022
Copy link
Member

@Luap99 Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@vrothberg
Copy link
Member Author

@containers/podman-maintainers PTAL

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Dec 9, 2022

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 9, 2022
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 205cb50 into containers:main Dec 9, 2022
@vrothberg vrothberg deleted the fix-14531 branch September 5, 2023 09:47
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Dec 5, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 5, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. release-note
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Active podman process blocks system reboot/shutdown
4 participants