kube play: sd-notify integration

[vrothberg]

Integrate sd-notify policies into kube play. The policies can be
configured for all contianers via the io.containers.sdnotify
annotation or for indidivual containers via the
io.containers.sdnotify/$name annotation.

The kube play process will wait for all containers to be ready by
waiting for the individual READY=1 messages which are received via
the pkg/systemd/notifyproxy proxy mechanism.

Also update the simple "container" sd-notify test as it did not fully
test the expected behavior which became obvious when adding the new
tests.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Rothberg [email protected]

Add support for specifying sd-notify policies in `kube play`.

Note: this the next step toward auto-update support for kube play. I will add that in another PR to make reviewing easier.

@giuseppe @mheon @edsantiago PTAL

[vrothberg]

Argh, final "fixes" before the push broke the test. Will look into it.

[vrothberg]

One more race condition in the test. We need to wait for the socat log. Probably worth adding that to the other tests as well.

[vrothberg]

Opened #15266 in hope to speed up the remote e2e tests. A factor of two slower is screaming for attention.

[vrothberg]

@edsantiago PTanotherL

[vrothberg]

[+1439s] # #/vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
[+1439s] # #| FAIL: Timed out waiting for /tmp/podman_bats.Q3dqlq/socat.log
[+1439s] # #^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Looks like we need to bump the timeout ...

[vrothberg]

@edsantiago @mheon PTanotherL

I hope that 15 seconds are sufficient for the log file to pop up on arch64 machine.

[edsantiago]

I hope that 15 seconds are sufficient for the log file to pop up on arch64 machine.

15 seconds is preposterous. I'm guessing that's not the problem, that it's something different about socat on these hosts. This may require doing the run-in-console thing.

[edsantiago]

@vrothberg you're going to need to skip_if_aarch64 "FIXME: #15277 sdnotify doesn't work on aarch64"

Please also update the comment on line 145 which says 15074. 15074 was a catchall, #15277 is specific to this bug.

Please also reduce the timeout. 15 seconds really is extreme.

And, someone gonna need to investigate and fix the bug itself.

[vrothberg]

Thanks a lot, @edsantiago. Updated as suggested.

[edsantiago]

Your timings, Monsieur:

type	distro	user	local	remote	container
int	fedora-36	root	30:54	46:07	29:51
int	ubuntu-2204	root	30:26	51:10
int	fedora-36	rootless	31:02
int	ubuntu-2204	rootless	28:57
sys	fedora-36	root	31:56	27:07
sys	fedora-36-aarch64	root	31:35	17:55
sys	ubuntu-2204	root	25:32	17:27
sys	fedora-36	rootless	29:06	34:28
sys	ubuntu-2204	rootless	27:12
bud	fedora-36	root	25:16	24:23

[vrothberg]

@giuseppe @flouthoc PTAL

[flouthoc]

LGTM

[vrothberg]

Merge me :)

[giuseppe]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: edsantiago, flouthoc, giuseppe, vrothberg

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [edsantiago,flouthoc,giuseppe,vrothberg]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment