Can not create a cluster when running on BTRFS + LUKS encryption

[bergmannf]

What happened:

When starting a kind cluster on an encrypted btrfs root partition the control-plane won't start up, because of an error in the kubelet:

Aug 11 07:33:59 kind-control-plane kubelet[833]: W0811 07:33:59.653820     833 fs.go:588] stat failed on /dev/mapper/luks-a389c146-db36-4c96-bcbc-0fa3f5f3fcd1 with error: no such file or directory
Aug 11 07:33:59 kind-control-plane kubelet[833]: E0811 07:33:59.653846     833 kubelet.go:1423] "Failed to start ContainerManager" err="failed to get rootfs info: failed to get device for dir \"/var/lib/kubelet\": could not find device with major: 0, minor: 40 in cached partitions map"

On the host the luks path is a symlink:

ls -la /dev/mapper
total 0
drwxr-xr-x.  2 root root      80 Aug 11 08:43 .
drwxr-xr-x. 21 root root    4600 Aug 11 08:44 ..
crw-------.  1 root root 10, 236 Aug 11 08:43 control
lrwxrwxrwx.  1 root root       7 Aug 11 08:43 luks-a389c146-db36-4c96-bcbc-0fa3f5f3fcd1 -> ../dm-0

As this path is not available in the container it fails.

What you expected to happen:

All paths required inside kind should be mapped into the node.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

Attempt to create a cluster on an encrypted root partition - in my case I simply installed Fedora and chose to encrypt the system in the installer.

Anything else we need to know?:

The issue is quite simple to fix, by just also mounting the missing path into the container.

With the following configuration it will work:

kind: Cluster
apiVersion: kind.x-k8s.io/v1alpha4
nodes:
- role: control-plane
  extraMounts:
    - hostPath: /dev/dm-0
      containerPath: /dev/dm-0
      propagation: HostToContainer

Environment:

• kind version: (use kind version):
  kind v0.11.1 go1.16.4 linux/amd64

• Kubernetes version: (use kubectl version):

Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"22", GitVersion:"v1.22.0", GitCommit:"c2b5237ccd9c0f1d600d3072634ca66cefdf272f", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2021-08-04T18:03:20Z", GoVersion:"go1.16.6", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"}
Server Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"21", GitVersion:"v1.21.2", GitCommit:"092fbfbf53427de67cac1e9fa54aaa09a28371d7", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2021-07-12T20:40:20Z", GoVersion:"go1.16.5", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"}

• Docker version: (use docker info): not running docker, but rootless podman
• OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release):

NAME=Fedora
VERSION="34 (Workstation Edition)"
ID=fedora
VERSION_ID=34
VERSION_CODENAME=""
PLATFORM_ID="platform:f34"
PRETTY_NAME="Fedora 34 (Workstation Edition)"
ANSI_COLOR="0;38;2;60;110;180"
LOGO=fedora-logo-icon
CPE_NAME="cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:34"
HOME_URL="https://fedoraproject.org/"
DOCUMENTATION_URL="https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/34/system-administrators-guide/"
SUPPORT_URL="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicating_and_getting_help"
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/"
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Fedora"
REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT_VERSION=34
REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT="Fedora"
REDHAT_SUPPORT_PRODUCT_VERSION=34
PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:PrivacyPolicy"
VARIANT="Workstation Edition"
VARIANT_ID=workstation

[BenTheElder]

Can you share docker info -f '{{json .}}' (er the podman equivilant)?

I'm wondering if we have an opportunity to detect that LUKS is in use from podman/docker, if we can we can mount /dev/dm-0 in the same way we do with detecting btrfs and mounting /dev/mapper

If not, we could alternatively maybe finish detection of podman version + detect if remote or not + if not remote inspect the host filesystem from the kind binary (and not solve remote + btrfs + luks though). #2233

[BenTheElder]

Er actually it seems these are LVM devices (and not LUKS specific?) in which case we have a bit of a worse problem, for the remote case in particular I'm not sure if we can enumerate these cleanly but we'll need to mount all /dev/dm-* and podman/docker can't express that. We can try to enumerate from kind directly but that presumes the kind binary has the same access as the podman invocation (which in particular won't be true for remote).

[BenTheElder]

At the very least this warrants a https://kind.sigs.k8s.io/docs/user/known-issues/ entry to start, with the workaround.

[bergmannf]

So here is the podman info -f '{{ json . }}':

{
  "host": {
    "arch": "amd64",
    "buildahVersion": "1.21.3",
    "cgroupManager": "systemd",
    "cgroupVersion": "v2",
    "cgroupControllers": [],
    "conmon": {
      "package": "conmon-2.0.29-2.fc34.x86_64",
      "path": "/usr/bin/conmon",
      "version": "conmon version 2.0.29, commit: "
    },
    "cpus": 8,
    "distribution": {
      "distribution": "fedora",
      "version": "34"
    },
    "eventLogger": "journald",
    "hostname": "fedora",
    "idMappings": {
      "gidmap": [
        {
          "container_id": 0,
          "host_id": 1000,
          "size": 1
        },
        {
          "container_id": 1,
          "host_id": 100000,
          "size": 65536
        }
      ],
      "uidmap": [
        {
          "container_id": 0,
          "host_id": 1000,
          "size": 1
        },
        {
          "container_id": 1,
          "host_id": 100000,
          "size": 65536
        }
      ]
    },
    "kernel": "5.13.8-200.fc34.x86_64",
    "memFree": 246652928,
    "memTotal": 16473628672,
    "ociRuntime": {
      "name": "crun",
      "package": "crun-0.20.1-1.fc34.x86_64",
      "path": "/usr/bin/crun",
      "version": "crun version 0.20.1\ncommit: 0d42f1109fd73548f44b01b3e84d04a279e99d2e\nspec: 1.0.0\n+SYSTEMD +SELINUX +APPARMOR +CAP +SECCOMP +EBPF +CRIU +YAJL"
    },
    "os": "linux",
    "remoteSocket": {
      "path": "/run/user/1000/podman/podman.sock"
    },
    "serviceIsRemote": false,
    "security": {
      "apparmorEnabled": false,
      "capabilities": "CAP_CHOWN,CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE,CAP_FOWNER,CAP_FSETID,CAP_KILL,CAP_NET_BIND_SERVICE,CAP_SETFCAP,CAP_SETGID,CAP_SETPCAP,CAP_SETUID,CAP_SYS_CHROOT",
      "rootless": true,
      "seccompEnabled": true,
      "seccompProfilePath": "/usr/share/containers/seccomp.json",
      "selinuxEnabled": true
    },
    "slirp4netns": {
      "executable": "/usr/bin/slirp4netns",
      "package": "slirp4netns-1.1.9-1.fc34.x86_64",
      "version": "slirp4netns version 1.1.8+dev\ncommit: 6dc0186e020232ae1a6fcc1f7afbc3ea02fd3876\nlibslirp: 4.4.0\nSLIRP_CONFIG_VERSION_MAX: 3\nlibseccomp: 2.5.0"
    },
    "swapFree": 6640889856,
    "swapTotal": 8589930496,
    "uptime": "2h 44m 10.18s (Approximately 0.08 days)",
    "linkmode": "dynamic"
  },
  "store": {
    "configFile": "/home/florian/.config/containers/storage.conf",
    "containerStore": {
      "number": 3,
      "paused": 0,
      "running": 0,
      "stopped": 3
    },
    "graphDriverName": "overlay",
    "graphOptions": {
      
    },
    "graphRoot": "/home/florian/.local/share/containers/storage",
    "graphStatus": {
      "Backing Filesystem": "btrfs",
      "Native Overlay Diff": "false",
      "Supports d_type": "true",
      "Using metacopy": "false"
    },
    "imageStore": {
      "number": 17
    },
    "runRoot": "/run/user/1000/containers",
    "volumePath": "/home/florian/.local/share/containers/storage/volumes"
  },
  "registries": {
    "search": [
  "registry.fedoraproject.org",
  "registry.access.redhat.com",
  "docker.io",
  "quay.io"
]
  },
  "version": {
    "APIVersion": "3.2.3",
    "Version": "3.2.3",
    "GoVersion": "go1.16.6",
    "GitCommit": "",
    "BuiltTime": "Mon Aug  2 21:39:21 2021",
    "Built": 1627933161,
    "OsArch": "linux/amd64"
  }
}

I don't think there should be any LVM devices (to be honest I only used the installation defaults and selected encryption AFAIR, but it has been a while) - I think those should just be the btrfs subvolumes:

sudo btrfs subvolume list /
ID 256 gen 2032098 top level 5 path home
ID 257 gen 2032110 top level 5 path root
ID 262 gen 1994774 top level 257 path var/lib/machines

(Neither lvscan nor lvdisplay show anything - after doubling checking - yes it should be only btrfs volumes - https://fedoramagazine.org/choose-between-btrfs-and-lvm-ext4/)

I was thinking that it might be enough to check if there is a symlink inside /dev/mapper and if so, follow it and mount the target as well?

[dahrens]

I hit the same issue on btrfs without LUKS. Using the workaround describe by @bergmannf worked for me as well.

[BenTheElder]

I was thinking that it might be enough to check if there is a symlink inside /dev/mapper and if so, follow it and mount the target as well?

We can only do this if we take care to ensure that podman/docker is not running on another host (which people unfortunately do depend on for e.g. CI and so on) else we're inspecting the wrong machine / filesystem which would be breaking if they differ (we'll try to mount the wrong things). (Discussion about mounting lv devices above applies to following symlinks instead).

[dahrens]

I dug a little deeper since in my case there is no symlink missing, but my btrfs device is just not mounted automatically into the node. I use btrfs without LUKS therefore there are no /dev/mapper devices. Instead I just have a partitioned disk that looks like that (from the fstab perspective).

# /dev/nvme0n1p2
UUID=3e04c83b-1d81-4159-9411-b4ad5bdef790	/         	btrfs     	rw,relatime,discard=async,ssd,space_cache,subvolid=256,subvol=/@,subvol=@	0 0

# /dev/nvme0n1p2
UUID=3e04c83b-1d81-4159-9411-b4ad5bdef790	/home     	btrfs     	rw,relatime,discard=async,ssd,space_cache,subvolid=257,subvol=/@home,subvol=@home	0 0

Therefore the solution worked out in #1416 does not work in that setup. I'm using btrfs as storageDriver as well. Providing /dev/nvme0n1p2 as an extraMount succesfully works around that glitch.

[BenTheElder]

I don't think there's a good way to discover these paths, and docker already is responsible for mounting /dev/... to the node, it just doesn't mount everything.

If we had very high confidence that the cluster was running against a local runtime and not a remote node we could have the kind binary attempt to inspect /dev for this, but right now we do not have that confidence and we'd risk breaking remote users by trying to add mounts to the nodes based on inspecting the wrong filesystem.

It's also worth noting that Kubernetes only tests on ext4/overlayfs, and kubernetes itself has had bugs with other filesystems.

[simon-geard]

Seeing the same thing as @dahrens ... a stock Fedora installation with BTRFS everywhere. Using the following config file seems to have worked.

kind: Cluster
apiVersion: kind.x-k8s.io/v1alpha4
nodes:
- role: control-plane
  extraMounts:
    - hostPath: /dev/nvme0n1p3
      containerPath: /dev/nvme0n1p3
      propagation: HostToContainer

I appreciate that this may be hard to resolve automatically, but it would be good to document it. What would it take to get this added to the "known issues" page? And can someone perhaps explain the nature of the problem? I get that it's failing because something inside the control plane wants access to the host filesystem, but I don't understand why it cares what's happening at the device layer?

[aojea]

What would it take to get this added to the "known issues" page?

Just a pr to this file https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kind/blob/main/site/content/docs/user/known-issues.md , contributions are welcome 😁