| mborzecki | morning | 05:45 |
|---|---|---|
| mardy | 'morning! | 06:04 |
| === oSoMoN_ is now known as oSoMoN | ||
| mborzecki | mardy: hey | 06:43 |
| mvo | good morning mardy and mborzecki | 06:47 |
| mardy | mvo: hi :-) | 06:53 |
| mborzecki | mvo: hey | 06:53 |
| mborzecki | hmm `/home/gopath/src/github.com/snapcore/snapd/tests/lib/prepare-restore.sh: line 518: go: command not found` during prepare on 21.04 | 07:13 |
| mborzecki | mvo: can you land https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10293 ? the failures are unrelated | 07:14 |
| mup | PR #10293: packaging/debian-sid: update locale patch for the latest master <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10293> | 07:14 |
| mvo | mborzecki: sure | 07:17 |
| mborzecki | mvo: thanks! | 07:18 |
| pstolowski | morning | 07:19 |
| mvo | good morning pstolowski | 07:19 |
| mup | PR snapd#10293 closed: packaging/debian-sid: update locale patch for the latest master <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10293> | 07:20 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: hey | 07:34 |
| mup | PR snapd#10295 opened: interfaces/apparmor: limit the number of jobs when running with a single CPU <Needs security review> <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10295> | 07:35 |
| mborzecki | hm should have added an [RFC] tag for that | 07:36 |
| mardy | mborzecki: "#define DEFAULT_JOBS_MAX -8 ... long jobs_max = -DEFAULT_JOBS_MAX;" I'm not sure I understand the logic here | 07:37 |
| mborzecki | mardy: haha, yeah that's fun, you need to take a look at process_jobs_arg(), auto_tune_parameters() and setup_parallel_compile(), and then there's a large'ish macro for spawning work | 07:39 |
| mborzecki | i think i got it right, but it's best if amurray takes a look (or maybe jjohansen if he has some time) | 07:40 |
| pstolowski | mborzecki: might be worth expanding the comment for -j0 | 07:44 |
| pstolowski | it's not obvious at all that giving -j0 is different than omitting it :/ | 07:46 |
| mardy | pstolowski: looks like your suggestion was spot on, now the spread tests are successful (well, some of them): https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10292 | 08:00 |
| mup | PR #10292: WIP: overlord/servicestate: omit service list if only snap given <Created by mardy> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10292> | 08:00 |
| pstolowski | mardy: ok, glad it was helpful. also it's good that i still somewhat understand what's going on there ;) | 08:03 |
| mardy | pstolowski: and this is the parameter that appears to be redundant. The change is very small: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10296 | 08:16 |
| mup | PR #10296: overlord/hookstate/ctlcmd: remove unneeded parameter <Created by mardy> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10296> | 08:16 |
| mup | PR snapd#10296 opened: overlord/hookstate/ctlcmd: remove unneeded parameter <Created by mardy> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10296> | 08:20 |
| pstolowski | mardy: thanks, +1 | 08:47 |
| mup | PR snapd#10297 opened: [RFC] cmd/snap: stacktrace debug endpoint <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10297> | 08:50 |
| === ogra_ is now known as Guest30743 | ||
| pstolowski | mborzecki: wdyt ^ ? | 08:53 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: i think it looks reasonable, added some questions | 09:09 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: hi, regarding your note, i've opened https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10295 | 09:11 |
| mup | PR #10295: [RFC] interfaces/apparmor: limit the number of jobs when running with a single CPU <Needs security review> <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10295> | 09:11 |
| pstolowski | mborzecki: thanks | 09:11 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: shouldn't we also look at memory? | 09:12 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: i'd like to refactor that code a bit when introducing tweaks for the memory, have something like `conserveMemory` flag similar to `conserveCPU` and pass that to the function that picks the number of jobs | 09:18 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: fwiw, apparmor_parser if none of the jobs settings were passed looks at the memory too, but it seems to be a very rough estimate, and the -j0 only kicks in when there's 2MB of free mem | 09:20 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: can you take a look at https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10255 ? | 09:21 |
| mup | PR #10255: tests/nested/core/core20-create-recovery: verify that recovery system can be created at runtime <Run nested> <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10255> | 09:21 |
| pstolowski | sure | 09:21 |
| mborzecki | thanks | 09:22 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: ah, forgot, you can make the stacktrace require post too | 09:37 |
| pstolowski | mborzecki: hmm what for? | 09:37 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: (as related to the comment you added in 10255) | 09:37 |
| mborzecki | pstolowski: that way it will require root/pokit access | 09:38 |
| pstolowski | mborzecki: ah, so get rid of get and do everything via post ? | 09:39 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: to me sounds like if we have <256mb we should also allow only a single process? | 09:47 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: why did mark 10295 needs security review? | 09:53 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: we need to parse meminfo for that | 09:53 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: but yeah, 256mb seems reasonable | 09:54 |
| mborzecki | and the label was added to have someone more familiar to have a pass from someone more familiar with apparmor_parser internals | 09:55 |
| mborzecki | dropped the label now | 09:56 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: you should probably ping JJ explicitly I suppose to ask for comments | 10:10 |
| mup | PR snapd#10298 opened: Add spread test for classic snaps content slots <Created by alfonsosanchezbeato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10298> | 10:21 |
| mup | PR snapd#10299 opened: store: extra log message, a few minor cleanups <Simple 😃> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10299> | 10:31 |
| pstolowski | that elusive download getting stuck issue is annoying :( | 10:44 |
| === ogra changed the topic of #snappy to: please move to libera.chat | ||
| === ogra changed the topic of #snappy to: please move to #snappy on libera.chat | ||
| mup | Bug #1929539 opened: pressing ctrl-alt-del on an attached USB KBD allows rebooting locked down devices <Snappy:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1929539> | 11:05 |
| * pstolowski errand | 11:09 | |
| mup | PR snapd#10300 opened: osutil: a helper to find out the total amount of memory in the system <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10300> | 11:36 |
| === pedronis_ is now known as pedronis | ||
| pedronis | pstolowski: hi, I did a pass on https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10290 lots of comments/questions there | 12:44 |
| mup | PR #10290: o/snapstate: add helpers for setting and querying holding time for snaps <Needs Samuele review> <Refresh control> <Created by stolowski> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10290> | 12:44 |
| pstolowski | pedronis: thanks | 12:45 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: is it a known issue that we get restore timeouts on Debian 10 ? | 12:50 |
| pedronis | this is with the interface tests | 12:50 |
| mup | PR snapd#10301 opened: seed/seedtest, overlord/devicestate: move seed validation helper to seedtest <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10301> | 12:51 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: no, not really, it was green with the patch tweaks from yesterday, do you have a log maybe? | 12:52 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: here, https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9043/checks?check_run_id=2664664397 | 12:52 |
| mup | PR #9043: daemon: replace access control flags on commands with access checkers <Created by jhenstridge> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9043> | 12:52 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: i think i've seen it, cachio was debugging a similar issue before, happens randomly when we're pking snapd.socket and systemd wakes up the snapd daemon, for some reason there's no EOF/socket not getting closed after receiving a complete response | 12:55 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: fwiw it seems very consistent atm on that PR with debian 10 | 12:58 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: we've seen it when adding fedora 34, maybe it's specific to a particular systemd version | 12:59 |
| mborzecki | (or go) | 12:59 |
| mup | PR snapd#10302 opened: overlord, overlord/devicestate: allow for reloading modeenv in devicemgr when testing <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10302> | 13:01 |
| mup | PR snapd#10294 closed: release-tools/changelog.py: refactor regexp + file reading/writing <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <Created by anonymouse64> <Merged by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10294> | 13:21 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: this commit was added for fedora 34 https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10249/commits/ae8b6f68961eec5a7948af73d50cb11e03c33846 | 13:30 |
| mup | PR #10249: tests: adding support for fedora-34 <Created by sergiocazzolato> <Merged by mvo5> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10249> | 13:30 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: something changed about systemd socket activation then? | 13:37 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: you are saying we might need this also for Debian 10 ? | 13:37 |
| pedronis | mvo: I forgot to mention this: https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10298#issuecomment-847825704 | 13:40 |
| mup | PR #10298: tests: add spread test for classic snaps content slots <Created by alfonsosanchezbeato> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10298> | 13:40 |
| mvo | pedronis: aha, I need to uplaod this? can do | 13:40 |
| pedronis | mvo: yes, I think you should look at the PR as the snaps are defined in it as well | 13:41 |
| mvo | +1 | 13:42 |
| pedronis | mvo: it's also in my queue to look at the PR but I have things before in the queue | 13:44 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: it's a bit weird, but yes, i was able to reproduce this locally too | 13:45 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: let's make a PR then? as I said it's also annoying because the timeout is long | 13:45 |
| mborzecki | pedronis: sure, fwiw, fedora 34 is using systemd 248, debian 10 - 247, i have 248 locally too | 13:47 |
| mup | PR snapd#9043 closed: daemon: replace access control flags on commands with access checkers <Created by jhenstridge> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/9043> | 13:51 |
| mup | PR snapd#10303 opened: tests/lib/reset: make nc exit after a while when connection is idle <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10303> | 13:56 |
| pedronis | mborzecki: I commented on https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10291 | 15:18 |
| mup | PR #10291: overlord/snapstate, overlord/devicestate: exclusive change conflict check <Created by bboozzoo> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10291> | 15:18 |
| === E_Eickmeyer is now known as Eickmeyer | ||
| * ijohnson is back | 15:40 | |
| mup | PR snapcraft#3528 opened: [wip] apt cache: raise PackageNotFoundError for packages without candidate <Created by cjp256> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/3528> | 15:47 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: do you have strong opinions on aligning the fields for `snap quota group1` output ? | 16:54 |
| ijohnson | currently we do not align the fields at all, but I think we should align it like this : | 16:54 |
| ijohnson | https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/MFHH864783/ | 16:54 |
| ijohnson | for example we align the output for snap info and snap model | 16:55 |
| ijohnson | also curious how you feel about ordering of the fields | 17:00 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: we should align them the same way we align snap info fields | 17:01 |
| ijohnson | I would propose this: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/2djbXWTjMn/ | 17:01 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: ack so we should align them, what order should we put them in ? | 17:02 |
| ijohnson | I note that it looks a little bit weird that the first field, name, has a lot of whitespace between the "name" and the actual name | 17:02 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: name, memory, subgroups, snaps | 17:03 |
| ijohnson | ack, what about current-memory vs max-memory ? which should go first ? | 17:03 |
| ijohnson | also /me -> lunch | 17:03 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: there's also the question if max should be there | 17:04 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: we removed it from command line and snap quotas | 17:04 |
| ijohnson | Yeah I was thinking maybe removing max- prefix too | 17:04 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: first constraint then current | 17:04 |
| pedronis | like in snap quotas | 17:04 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: current-memory is very long, that's why we get the aligment issue | 17:07 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: one option is to have "constraints:" and "current:" sections | 17:08 |
| pedronis | as info as channels: and notes: | 17:08 |
| pedronis | *HAS | 17:10 |
| pedronis | *has | 17:10 |
| mup | PR snapd#10303 closed: tests/lib/reset: make nc exit after a while when connection is idle <Simple 😃> <Created by bboozzoo> <Merged by pedronis> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10303> | 17:12 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: I like the constraints and current sections, let me quick prototype that out | 17:21 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: how does this look https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/c5DYtS4XWf/ ? | 17:25 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: looks reasonable to me | 17:26 |
| ijohnson | this is with fixed alignment https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/qbWFGJgbcV/ | 17:26 |
| ijohnson | ok great | 17:26 |
| pedronis | ijohnson: you should look at snap info for alignment because it seems it aligns subsections differently, unless I'm confused | 17:27 |
| ijohnson | pedronis: will do thanks | 18:35 |
| mup | PR snapd#10304 opened: systemd: add CurrentMemoryUsage to get current memory usage for a unit <Simple 😃> <Skip spread> <quota> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10304> | 19:47 |
| mup | PR snapd#10305 opened: daemon/api_quotas.go: support updating quotas with ensure action <quota> <Created by anonymouse64> <https://github.com/snapcore/snapd/pull/10305> | 20:02 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!