On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 11:20:37AM -0700, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
> On 7/10/2026 4:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 10, 2026 at 12:47:28PM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote:
> >> Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >> (added Edgar for Microblaze)
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 09:24:12AM -0700, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
> >>>> On 7/9/2026 9:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 07:48:14AM -0700, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2/10/2026 8:35 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> >>>>>>> When a developer's environment is already within a podman container it
> >>>>>>> is not possible to use 'podman' again to create containers. It will
> >>>>>>> usually result in wierd errors such as:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   Error: fatal error, invalid internal status, unable to create a new 
> >>>>>>> pause process: cannot re-exec process to join the existing user 
> >>>>>>> namespace. Try running "podman system migrate" and if that doesn't 
> >>>>>>> work reboot to recover
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Podman offers the ability to talk to a daemon outside the container,
> >>>>>>> however, which could be leveraged by QEMU.
> >>>>>>>
> >> <snip>
> >>>>>> Taking a look at why tcg tests are slow to compile, I reached this
> >>>>>> commit. It seems like that calling 'podman info' is 5 to 10 times 
> >>>>>> slower
> >>>>>> than calling 'podman version'.
> >>>>>> Thus, a container run now takes +1s when it was 0.2 before.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hmmm, but we call 'docker.py probe' in configure and cache the result,
> >>>>> so that probe should only be done once.  0.2 vs 1s is just noise in
> >>>>> the context of configure.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That you're seeing any negative effects suggests that we've got
> >>>>> something not using the cached probe result, which we should fix.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Not really, docker.py --engine X still calls X info.
> >>>>
> >>>> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/blob/master/tests/docker/docker.py#L675
> >>>> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/blob/master/tests/docker/docker.py#L78
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe the fix is to remove the check if user specified an explicit
> >>>> engine. But in this case, there is a problem with podman-remote not
> >>>> being detected anymore.
> >>>>
> >>>> We can fix this by introducing engine=podman-remote, and skip the check
> >>>> if engine is explicitly set.
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>>
> >>> Urgh, so i see now we have two code paths / make variables
> >>>
> >>>   RUNC=podman --remote
> >>>   CONTAINER_ENGINE=auto
> >>>
> >>> Sometimes we'll invoke docker.py --engine $(CONTAINER_ENGINE)
> >>> and sometimes we'll directly invoke $(RUNC).
> >>
> >> Yeah that could do with cleaning up. I suspect the only places we
> >> actually still need the script is where we are doing binfmt_misc enabled
> >> containers unless there is a way to emulate the copying of qemu into the
> >> container with a plain call? Maybe all the systems now have the
> >> persistent flags which would skip this.
> > 
> > Yeah, I'd be inclined to say this is a job for the distros to have
> > qemu-user integration, and simplify our life. THe docker.py script
> > always confuses me.  We could choose podman vs podman --remote vs
> > docker simply in the meson.build file, as we do for other dev env
> > choices.
> > 
> >> The toolchain case could be skipped if we could find hosted compilers
> >> for microblaze. However I do see we have a patch in there.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The result of "probe" cannot be fed back in to "--engine" which
> >>> is a bit of a mess. I think the "engine" concept should not be
> >>> exposed on the cli, and instead have a "--runc" arg which takes
> >>> the full arg(s), since we need probe to report the runc args
> >>> for other reasons.
> >>>
> >>> With regards,
> >>> Daniel
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Alex Bennée
> >> Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro
> >>
> > 
> > With regards,
> > Daniel
> 
> Is it me or did we incredibly derailed from original issue which was:
> "It was fast to query which container engine is available, and now it's
> 5-10 times slower to accommodate toolbox workflow where podman is
> available but not really available?"
> I agree it's sad to have several ways to set container engine, but it's
> absolutely not related to the current issue.

It is relevant because that difference in speed is not something that
should be noticable unless something is repeatedly probing over & over
again which should not be done.

> Daniel, since you introduced the slow check path with podman info for
> your personal need, I would appreciate if it's something you could fix also.

I'll looking into the missing caching.

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com       ~~        https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org          ~~          https://entangle-photo.org :|
|: https://pixelfed.art/berrange   ~~    https://fstop138.berrange.com :|


Reply via email to