On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 12:59:26 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
> memory/cpu limits by means of the cgroup filesystem. If neither of
On Fri, 3 May 2024 16:05:30 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
On Fri, 3 May 2024 15:58:11 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/sun/launcher/LauncherHelper.java line 375:
>>
>>> 373: if (!c.isContainerized()) {
>>> 374: ostream.println(INDENT + "System not containerized.");
>>> 375: return;
>>
>> Why
On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 13:56:23 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
> Anyway in this patch one could unify naming across variables/parameters, the
> same value is called `_is_ro`, `is_read_only`, `ro_opt`, `read_only`, `ro`.
I've tried to unify the naming a bit. Thanks for the review!
-
PR
> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
> memory/cpu limits by means of the cgroup filesystem. If neither of
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:21:29 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> Why return here?
Because it's not useful to see containerized settings (other than the cg
version in use) after this patch. The JVM won't use them (uses the physical
settings instead). Why would you want to show the settings?
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:16:33 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains ten additional
>>
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 18:10:08 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> src/hotspot/os/linux/cgroupSubsystem_linux.cpp line 351:
>>
>>> 349: //
>>> 350: // We collect the read only mount option in the cgroup infos so as
>>> to have that
>>> 351: // info ready when determining is_containerized().
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 05:18:51 GMT, Laurence Cable wrote:
> I think (I am agreeing with you Severin) that the goal of the heuristic is to
> inform the JVM (and any associated serviceability tools) that the JVM is in a
> resource constrained/managed execution context...
"resource constrained"
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:08:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
On 4/18/24 2:54 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 01:07:04 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
IMHO `is_containerized()` is OK to return `false` even when running in a
container but with no limitations set.
The idea here is to use this property to tune OpenJDK for in-container,
On 4/18/24 9:38 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 13:27:38 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
Could not we rename `is_containerized()` to `use_container_limit()` ? As that
is the current only purpose of `is_containerized()`.
I'm not sure. There is value to have `is_containerized()`
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 13:27:38 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
> Could not we rename `is_containerized()` to `use_container_limit()` ? As that
> is the current only purpose of `is_containerized()`.
I'm not sure. There is value to have `is_containerized()` like it would behave
after this patch.
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:08:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 01:07:04 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
>>> IMHO `is_containerized()` is OK to return `false` even when running in a
>>> container but with no limitations set.
>>
>> The idea here is to use this property to tune OpenJDK for in-container,
>> specifically k8s, use. In such a
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:17:33 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> The idea here is to use this property to tune OpenJDK for in-container,
> specifically k8s, use. In such a setup it's custom to run a single process
> within set resource constraints.
The in-container tuning means to use all the
On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 18:29:59 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains ten additional
>>
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:08:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 14:40:46 GMT, Jan Kratochvil
wrote:
> IMHO `is_containerized()` is OK to return `false` even when running in a
> container but with no limitations set.
The idea here is to use this property to tune OpenJDK for in-container,
specifically k8s, use. In such a setup it's
On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 12:08:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
>> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
>> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
>>
> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
> memory/cpu limits by means of the cgroup filesystem. If neither of
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 16:55:36 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
> memory/cpu
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 16:55:36 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows
> it to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container
> (`podman`, `docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces
> memory/cpu
Please review this enhancement to the container detection code which allows it
to figure out whether the JVM is actually running inside a container (`podman`,
`docker`, `crio`), or with some other means that enforces memory/cpu limits by
means of the cgroup filesystem. If neither of those
25 matches
Mail list logo
