[lxc-devel] LXCFS update problems
Serge Hallyn
serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com
Thu Nov 19 17:27:07 UTC 2015
Quoting Dietmar Maurer (dietmar at proxmox.com):
>
>
> > On November 19, 2015 at 4:46 PM Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Quoting Dietmar Maurer (dietmar at proxmox.com):
> > > > Update the lxcfs package stop/restart the fuse filesystem. So this
> > > > breaks all active containers.
> > > >
> > > > AFAIK restarting fuse without umount is not possible, so are there
> > > > any other ideas how to solve that problem?
> > >
> > > The following lxcfs.service seems to behave much better:
> > >
> > > -------------------------------
> > > [Unit]
> > > Description=FUSE filesystem for LXC
> > > ConditionVirtualization=!container
> > > Before=lxc.service
> > >
> > > [Service]
> > > ExecStart=/usr/bin/lxcfs -f -s -o allow_other /var/lib/lxcfs/
> > > KillMode=none
> > > Restart=on-failure
> > > ExecStop=/bin/fusermount -u /var/lib/lxcfs
> > >
> > > [Install]
> > > WantedBy=multi-user.target
> > > ---------------------------------
> > >
> > > Because this does not kill a running lxcfs as long as there are references.
> > > Would this have any drawbacks?
> >
> > I don't think so. At the least we'd need killmode to also umount -l
> > /var/lib/lxcfs after killing the process,
>
> The idea is that fuse is stopped by the last umount (instead of killing the
> process).
> Note: we unmount with ExecStop
>
> > but that's not good enough,
> > because even if lxcfs is cleanly restarted any running containers will
> > not get the new lxcfs mount.
>
> But much better than the current behavior (and simple to implement)?
Sorry, I should have proofread my reply. I combined several thoughts.
In summary, I think yours is the best we can do - thanks! I intend to
add that to the lxcfs package, and then hopefully put the init scripts
into the git tree as well.
-serge
More information about the lxc-devel
mailing list