Message-ID: <20180909013108.6wjlx75ztqjipepg@mailbox.org>
Date:   Sun, 9 Sep 2018 03:31:08 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephane Graber <stgraber@...ntu.com>,
        containers@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        overlayfs <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        lxc-users@...ts.linuxcontainers.org,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        lxc-devel@...ts.linuxcontainers.org,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Containers and checkpoint/restart micro-conference at LPC2018

On Sat, Sep 08, 2018 at 10:41:41AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 8:00 AM Stéphane Graber <stgraber@...ntu.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > This year's edition of the Linux Plumbers Conference will once again
> > > have a containers micro-conference but this time around we'll have twice
> > > the usual amount of time and will include the content that would
> > > traditionally go into the checkpoint/restore micro-conference.
> > >
> > > LPC2018 will be held in Vancouver, Canada from the 13th to the 15th of
> > > November, co-located with the Linux Kernel Summit.
> > >
> > >
> > > We're looking for discussion topics around kernel work related to
> > > containers and namespacing, resource control, access control,
> > > checkpoint/restore of kernel structures, filesystem/mount handling for
> > > containers and any related userspace work.
> > >
> > >
> > > The format of the event will mostly be discussions where someone
> > > introduces a given topic/problem and it then gets discussed for 20-30min
> > > before moving on to something else. There will also be limited room for
> > > short demos of recent work with shorter 15min slots.
> > >
> > >
> > > Details can be found here:
> > >
> > >   https://discuss.linuxcontainers.org/t/containers-micro-conference-at-linux-plumbers-2018/2417
> > >
> > >
> > > Looking forward to seeing you in Vancouver!
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > We've added an extra week to the CFP, new deadline is Friday 14th of September.
> >
> > If you were thinking about sending something bug then forgot or just
> > missed the deadline, now is your chance to send it!
> >
> 
> [cc: overlayfs developers]
> 
> Hi Stéphane!

Hey Amir,

I'm one of the co-organizers of the microconf.

> 
> I am not planing to travel to LPC this year, so this is more of an FYI than
> a CFP, but maybe another overlayfs developer can pick up this glove??

Sure, that would be great.

> 
> For the past two years I have participated in the effort to fix overlayfs
> "non-standard" behavior:
> https://github.com/amir73il/overlayfs/wiki/Overlayfs-non-standard-behavior

Yes, this is an issue that we were aware of for a long time and it
something that has made overlayfs somewhat more difficult to use than it
should be.

> 
> Allegedly, this effort went underway to improve the experience of overlayfs
> users, who are mostly applications running inside containers. For backward
> compatibility reasons, container runtimes will need to opt-in for fixing some
> of the legacy behavior.
> 
> In reality, I have seen very little cross list interaction between linux-unionfs
> and containers mailing lists. The only interaction I recall in the
> past two years
> ended up in a fix in overlayfs to require opt-in for fixing yet another backward
> compatible bad behavior, although docker did follow up shortly after to fix
> bad practice in container runtime:
> https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/34672
> 
> So the questions I would like to relay to the micro-conf participants w.r.t the
> new opt-in overlayfs behavior:
> 1. Did you know?

I personally did not know about the new opt-in behavior. More reason to
give a talk! :)

> 2. Do you care?

Yes, we do care. However - speaking as LXC upstream now - we have
recently focused on getting shiftfs to work rather than overlayfs.

We are more than happy to have a overlayfs talk at the microconf. If
someone were to talk about:
- What non-standard behavior has already been fixed?
- How has it been fixed?
- What non-standard behavior still needs to be fixed?
- Outstanding problems that either still need a solution or
  are solved but one would like feedback on the implementation. This way
  we can have a good discussion.

Thanks!
Christian

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists