generated from krisnova/rust-nova
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
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
Few fixes that allow auraed to run as true PID 1 #447
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7366270
Few fixes that allow auraed to run as true PID 1
JeroenSoeters f04a967
Properly configure default gateway
JeroenSoeters f148666
Bind on INADDR6_ANY instead of INADDR6_LOOPBACK
JeroenSoeters d6fc904
Merge branch 'main' into true-pid-1
krisnova File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was throwing a "Resource busy" so I presumed this wasn't actually needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it just a feature of cloud-hypervisor that /dev is already mounted, but we would need to mount it in a non-vm context (i.e., true-true PID 1 for lack of a better identifier)?
Maybe the try and continue approach is right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking at cloud-hypervisor's config that you linked to in #439 I see the following in the file:
Would this config be causing the mount to already be mounted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably so. "Resource busy" usually means that the device is already mounted afaik
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sounds like we should try and mount just in case the config doesn't exist to automatically mount it (but allow the error if it fails... maybe log a warning)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should probably do that for all mounts we deem essential. I'm wondering though if we should do this now or if we can postpone this to later when we allow for kernels other than the ones we control - if we ever are planning to let users provide their own kernel this at all, as this introduces a whole set of other challenges. Until that point we know with 100% certainty what is mounted and what is not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lets postpone until later once we have better control of the kernels we are running.