Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net writes: On Fri, 10.10.14 18:48, Richard Weinberger (rich...@nod.at) wrote: Lennart, Am 10.10.2014 um 18:44 schrieb Lennart Poettering: It's a bit more complex. While UML, qemu, kvm, currently don't, LXC, systemd-nspawn and libvirt-lxc all do talk directly to machined. (Note that LXC and libvirt-lxc are separate codebases, the latter is *not* a wrapper around the former). So, dunno, it really is up to how you intend UML to be used. If UML shall be nice and useful without libvirt, then it's worth doing the registration natively, but it's also OK to just leave this to libvirt, if that's your primary envisioned usecase... What is the benefit of this registration? I boot all day long UML and qemu-kvm VMs without registering them to systemd, so I don't really know what I'm missing. :-) But if there is a nice use case I'll happily add the registration to UML. Hmm, I figure this mail didn't make it through to you? http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-October/023875.html I don't see that mail in my mailbox either and I know that you noticed some mail not arriving before. It seems to cause quite a lot of confusion in discussion and patch submission. I'm not sure who to report this to. -- Jan Synacek Software Engineer, Red Hat ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 06:44:03PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Wed, 17.09.14 10:24, Richard Weinberger (richard.weinber...@gmail.com) wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:31:05PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? Yes, this sounds useful. After all is just another mechanism of virtualization, and in this case can be treated similarly to containers and vms. I still want a sane reason and a usecase for that. Can someone please educate me? :-) Please note that also qemu does not register itself to systemd. libvirt does. I think going down this path makes also sense for UML as libvirt has a UML driver too. qemu and the UML ELF image are the low level building blocks. Managers like libvirt should register the virtual machines created by LXC, UML, qemu, etc.. to systemd. It's a bit more complex. While UML, qemu, kvm, currently don't, LXC, systemd-nspawn and libvirt-lxc all do talk directly to machined. (Note that LXC and libvirt-lxc are separate codebases, the latter is *not* a wrapper around the former). Libvirt registers both LXC QEMU/KVM guests with machined. We don't currently register UML guests with machined, but that is simply because UML isn't really a high priority target for people anymore and so hasn't been updated to use libvirt's cgroup/systemd integration support. From the libvirt POV i'd be happy to see patches to make it register with machined. I'm not sure that standalone UML binaries need to directly integrate/register with systemd - I tend to view it as a job for whatever is managing UML to decide todo that. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
Jan Synacek jsyna...@redhat.com writes: Lennart Poettering lenn...@poettering.net writes: On Fri, 10.10.14 18:48, Richard Weinberger (rich...@nod.at) wrote: Lennart, Am 10.10.2014 um 18:44 schrieb Lennart Poettering: It's a bit more complex. While UML, qemu, kvm, currently don't, LXC, systemd-nspawn and libvirt-lxc all do talk directly to machined. (Note that LXC and libvirt-lxc are separate codebases, the latter is *not* a wrapper around the former). So, dunno, it really is up to how you intend UML to be used. If UML shall be nice and useful without libvirt, then it's worth doing the registration natively, but it's also OK to just leave this to libvirt, if that's your primary envisioned usecase... What is the benefit of this registration? I boot all day long UML and qemu-kvm VMs without registering them to systemd, so I don't really know what I'm missing. :-) But if there is a nice use case I'll happily add the registration to UML. Hmm, I figure this mail didn't make it through to you? http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-October/023875.html I don't see that mail in my mailbox either and I know that you noticed some mail not arriving before. It seems to cause quite a lot of confusion in discussion and patch submission. I'm not sure who to report this to. Bah, never mind, I can see the mail now... -- Jan Synacek Software Engineer, Red Hat ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
On Wed, 17.09.14 10:24, Richard Weinberger (richard.weinber...@gmail.com) wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:31:05PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? Yes, this sounds useful. After all is just another mechanism of virtualization, and in this case can be treated similarly to containers and vms. I still want a sane reason and a usecase for that. Can someone please educate me? :-) Please note that also qemu does not register itself to systemd. libvirt does. I think going down this path makes also sense for UML as libvirt has a UML driver too. qemu and the UML ELF image are the low level building blocks. Managers like libvirt should register the virtual machines created by LXC, UML, qemu, etc.. to systemd. It's a bit more complex. While UML, qemu, kvm, currently don't, LXC, systemd-nspawn and libvirt-lxc all do talk directly to machined. (Note that LXC and libvirt-lxc are separate codebases, the latter is *not* a wrapper around the former). So, dunno, it really is up to how you intend UML to be used. If UML shall be nice and useful without libvirt, then it's worth doing the registration natively, but it's also OK to just leave this to libvirt, if that's your primary envisioned usecase... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
Lennart, Am 10.10.2014 um 18:44 schrieb Lennart Poettering: It's a bit more complex. While UML, qemu, kvm, currently don't, LXC, systemd-nspawn and libvirt-lxc all do talk directly to machined. (Note that LXC and libvirt-lxc are separate codebases, the latter is *not* a wrapper around the former). So, dunno, it really is up to how you intend UML to be used. If UML shall be nice and useful without libvirt, then it's worth doing the registration natively, but it's also OK to just leave this to libvirt, if that's your primary envisioned usecase... What is the benefit of this registration? I boot all day long UML and qemu-kvm VMs without registering them to systemd, so I don't really know what I'm missing. :-) But if there is a nice use case I'll happily add the registration to UML. Thanks, //richard ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:24:18AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:31:05PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? Yes, this sounds useful. After all is just another mechanism of virtualization, and in this case can be treated similarly to containers and vms. I still want a sane reason and a usecase for that. Can someone please educate me? :-) Please note that also qemu does not register itself to systemd. libvirt does. I think going down this path makes also sense for UML as libvirt has a UML driver too. qemu and the UML ELF image are the low level building blocks. Managers like libvirt should register the virtual machines created by LXC, UML, qemu, etc.. to systemd. True, it probably is better to do at it the level of libvirt. Zbyszek ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
[systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? I think machined gives you a nice overview over all running UML instances, also you get the scope unit and the control groups with above registration to machined. anything else on the plus side? The user-mode-mailing list did ask why exactly my patch is needed. So what do you think? with kind regards thomas PS: I wonder what happens when I write a service unit file that starts an user mode linux instance and that instance will register with machined? won't both control groups overlap, i.e. the scope unit and the service unit? or is this not a problem? ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Thomas Meyer tho...@m3y3r.de wrote: Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? I think machined gives you a nice overview over all running UML instances, also you get the scope unit and the control groups with above registration to machined. anything else on the plus side? The user-mode-mailing list did ask why exactly my patch is needed. The user-mode-mailing is also reading this list BTW. :) -- Thanks, //richard ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
Re: [systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:31:05PM +0200, Thomas Meyer wrote: Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? Yes, this sounds useful. After all is just another mechanism of virtualization, and in this case can be treated similarly to containers and vms. PS: I wonder what happens when I write a service unit file that starts an user mode linux instance and that instance will register with machined? won't both control groups overlap, i.e. the scope unit and the service unit? or is this not a problem? systemd-nspawn has --keep-unit. You probably need something similar to disable the creation of scope. Zbyszek ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
[systemd-devel] Should user mode linux register with machined?
Hi, I wrote a small patch for user-mode linux to register with machined by calling CreateMachine. Is this a good idea to do so? I think machined gives you a nice overview over all running UML instances, also you get the scope unit and the control groups with above registration to machined. anything else on the plus side? The user-mode-mailing list did ask why exactly my patch is needed. So what do you think? with kind regards thomas PS: I wonder what happens when I write a service unit file that starts an user mode linux instance and that instance will register with machined? won't both control groups overlap, i.e. the scope unit and the service unit? or is this not a problem? ___ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
