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 [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:

quoted

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