only sudo if you aren't already the user running the jvm process #76
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
this enables usage inside docker containers that don't contain sudo, when running `docker exec` as the user running the jvm process, eg:`docker exec -it --user daemon` because perf maps may now be created as the jvm process user, we need to tell perf script/top/report to not check ownership by using the --force flag
|
@jrudolph are you able to remove this? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
this enables usage inside docker containers that don't contain sudo, when running
docker execas the user running the jvm processeg: when perf-map-agent is installed at
/perf-map-agent/inside a container running a single jvm process as userdaemon, create a perf-map in the container's/tmpas follows:NB: the pid of the perf map will be the pid in the container's namespace, not the host's.
hopefully addresses concerns in #18