Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[1.9] fix tap offload features on restore and debuginfo #4829

Merged

Conversation

kalyazin
Copy link
Contributor

@kalyazin kalyazin commented Oct 2, 2024

Changes

Cherry-pick from #4826, #4790 and its dependency.

Reason

Backporting.

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • [ ] If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • The description of changes is clear and encompassing.
  • Any required documentation changes (code and docs) are included in this
    PR.
  • [ ] API changes follow the Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • User-facing changes are mentioned in CHANGELOG.md.
  • [ ] All added/changed functionality is tested.
  • [ ] New TODOs link to an issue.
  • Commits meet
    contribution quality standards.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

kalyazin and others added 3 commits October 2, 2024 11:20
Tap offload features configuration was moved from the device creation
time to the device activation time by the following commit:

commit 1e5d3db
Author: Nikita Zakirov <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Jan 19 15:48:21 2024 +0000

    fix(net): Apply only supported TAP offloading features

Since device activation code is only called on the boot path, the
features were not automatically configured on the restore path.
This change configures them on the restore path as well.

The change does not include a unit test as we do not have a mockable
interface for the tap device.
The change does not include an integration test as we have not yet found
a way to reproduce the issue using the existing test framework.

Signed-off-by: Nikita Kalyazin <[email protected]>
The idea here is that these tests depend on the compilation step, and
thus test a production binary. This smells "integration" to me. The
actual reason for moving this however is so that we can have the `build`
group no longer depend on the shared compilation step.

Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
Seems recently Cargo defaulted to use `strip=debuginfo`. This
inadvertently made our debuginfo files much smaller

Fix the issue by using `strip=none` and add a test so that it breaks if
this somehow changes again.

Signed-off-by: Pablo Barbáchano <[email protected]>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 2, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 20.00000% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 84.33%. Comparing base (d3b02e0) to head (f1a09cf).
Report is 3 commits behind head on firecracker-v1.9.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/vmm/src/devices/virtio/net/persist.rs 0.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##           firecracker-v1.9    #4829      +/-   ##
====================================================
- Coverage             84.34%   84.33%   -0.02%     
====================================================
  Files                   249      249              
  Lines                 27461    27465       +4     
====================================================
  Hits                  23162    23162              
- Misses                 4299     4303       +4     
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-c5n.metal 84.55% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m5n.metal 84.53% <20.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
5.10-m6a.metal 83.82% <20.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
5.10-m6g.metal 80.90% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m6i.metal 84.54% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m7g.metal 80.90% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-c5n.metal 84.55% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m5n.metal 84.53% <20.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
6.1-m6a.metal 83.82% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m6g.metal 80.90% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m6i.metal 84.53% <20.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
6.1-m7g.metal 80.90% <20.00%> (-0.02%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@kalyazin kalyazin self-assigned this Oct 2, 2024
@kalyazin kalyazin marked this pull request as ready for review October 2, 2024 13:20
@kalyazin kalyazin requested review from xmarcalx and pb8o as code owners October 2, 2024 13:20
@kalyazin kalyazin added the Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed label Oct 2, 2024
@kalyazin kalyazin changed the title [1.9] ensure debuginfo file contains debugging info [1.9] fix tap offload features on restore and debuginfo Oct 2, 2024
@kalyazin kalyazin merged commit 71e478d into firecracker-microvm:firecracker-v1.9 Oct 2, 2024
7 of 8 checks passed
@kalyazin kalyazin deleted the debuginfo_1.9 branch October 2, 2024 14:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants