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

DO NOT MERGE: ocp-next #2148

Draft
wants to merge 2,324 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

DO NOT MERGE: ocp-next #2148

wants to merge 2,324 commits into from

Conversation

bertinatto
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the backports/unvalidated-commits Indicates that not all commits come to merged upstream PRs. label Nov 28, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 28, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 28, 2024

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the vendor-update Touching vendor dir or related files label Nov 28, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 28, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bertinatto

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:

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 28, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test verify

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test verify
/test images

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test all

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test all

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test k8s-e2e-gcp-ovn
/test k8s-e2e-gcp-serial
/test integration

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test all

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test k8s-e2e-gcp-ovn
/test k8s-e2e-gcp-serial

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

liouk and others added 24 commits April 3, 2025 13:09
…self-SARs that have user:check-access

Otherwise, the request will inherit any scopes that an access token might have
and the scopeAuthorizer will deny the access review if the scopes do not include
user:full
This commit renews openshift#327

What has changed compared to the original PR is:
- The retryClient interface has been adapted to storage.Interface.
- The isRetriableEtcdError method has been completely changed; it seems that previously the error we wanted to retry was not being retried. Even the unit tests were failing.

Overall, I still think this is not the correct fix. The proper fix should be added to the etcd client.

UPSTREAM: <carry>: retry etcd Unavailable errors

This is the second commit for the retry logic.
This commit adds unit tests and slightly improves the logging.

During a rebase squash with the previous one.

UPSTREAM: <carry>: retry_etcdclient: expose retry logic functionality

during rebase merge with: UPSTREAM: <carry>: retry etcd Unavailable errors
When a PerformanceProfile configures a node for cpu partitioning,
it also lets OVS use all the cpus available to burstable pods.
To be able to do that, OVS was moved to its own slice and that
slice needs to be re-added to cAdvisor for monitoring purposes.
Kubelet should advertise the shared cpus as extedned resources.
This has the benefit of limiting the amount of containers
that can request an access to the shared cpus.

For more information see - openshift/enhancements#1396

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <[email protected]>
Adding a new mutation plugin that handles the following:

1. In case of `workload.openshift.io/enable-shared-cpus` request, it
   adds an annotation to hint runtime about the request. runtime
   is not aware of extended resources, hence we need the annotation.
2. It validates the pod's QoS class and return an error if it's not a
   guaranteed QoS class
3. It validates that no more than a single resource is being request.
4. It validates that the pod deployed in a namespace that has mixedcpus
   workloads allowed annotation.

For more information see - openshift/enhancements#1396

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: Update management webhook pod admission logic

Updating the logic for pod admission to allow a pod creation with workload partitioning annotations to be run in a namespace that has no workload allow annoations.

The pod will be stripped of its workload annotations and treated as if it were normal, a warning annoation will be placed to note the behavior on the pod.

Signed-off-by: ehila <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: add support for cpu limits into management workloads

Added support to allow workload partitioning to use the CPU limits for a container, to allow the runtime to make better decisions around workload cpu quotas we are passing down the cpu limit as part of the cpulimit value in the annotation. CRI-O will take that information and calculate the quota per node. This should support situations where workloads might have different cpu period overrides assigned.

Updated kubelet for static pods and the admission webhook for regular to support cpu limits.

Updated unit test to reflect changes.

Signed-off-by: ehila <[email protected]>
…ject openshift feature gates into pkg/features

Signed-off-by: Swarup Ghosh <[email protected]>
This is a short term fix, once we improve the cert rotation logic
in library-go that does not depend on this hack, then we can
remove this carry patch.

squash with the previous PR during the rebase
openshift#1924

squash with the previous PRs during the rebase
openshift#1924
openshift#1929
…phase and graceful termination phase

This reverts commit 85f0f2c.
…navailable errors for the etcd health checker client

UPSTREAM: <carry>: replace newETCD3ProberMonitor with etcd3RetryingProberMonitor
This commit fixes bug 1919737.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919737

* pkg/proxy/iptables/proxier.go (syncProxyRules): Prefer a local endpoint
for the cluster DNS service.
similarly to what we do for the managed CPU (aka workload partitioning)
feature, introduce a master configuration file
`/etc/kubernetes/openshift-llc-alignment` which needs to be present for
the LLC alignment feature to be activated, in addition to the policy
option being required.

Note this replace the standard upstream feature gate check.

This can be dropped when the feature per  KEP
kubernetes/enhancements#4800 goes beta.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
The existing patch retried any etcd error returned from storage with the code "Unavailable". Writes
can only be safely retried if the client can be absolutely sure that the initial attempt ended
before persisting any changes. The "Unavailable" code includes errors like "timed out" that can't be
safely retried for writes.
Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: authorization: add minimumkubeletversion package

MinimumKubeletVersion is a way for an admin to declare that nodes any older than the
minimum version cannot authorize with the apiserver. This effectively prevents them from joining.

Doing so means the apiservers can trust newer features are usable on clusters with version skews

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: authorizer: move mininum kubelet version authorizer to pkg/kubeapiserver and add authorization mode

this does require a line of code be moved from the enablement package to stop a cyclical import

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: crdvalidation: move latency profile file to be agnostic of field

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>

UPSTREAM: <carry>: features: add MinimumKubeletVersion feature

Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <[email protected]>
Upstream enables volume group snapshots by editing yaml files in a shell
script [1]. We can't use this script in openshift-tests.

Create a brand new, OCP specific test driver based on csi-driver-hostpath,
only with the --feature-gate=VolumeGroupSnapshot on external-snapshotter command line.

We will need to carry this patch until the feature graduates to GA. I've
chosen to create brand new files in this carry patch, so it can't conflict
with the existing ones.

1: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/91d6fd3455c4a071408df20c7f48df221f2b6d30/test/e2e/testing-manifests/storage-csi/external-snapshotter/volume-group-snapshots/run_group_snapshot_e2e.sh
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@bertinatto: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test all

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@bertinatto
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-gcp
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 4, 2025

@bertinatto: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-gcp-serial 905af45 link true /test k8s-e2e-gcp-serial
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-crun 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-crun
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-aws-ovn-serial 905af45 link false /test k8s-e2e-aws-ovn-serial
ci/prow/e2e-aws-crun-wasm 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-crun-wasm
ci/prow/e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade 905af45 link true /test e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-cgroupsv2 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-cgroupsv2
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-runc 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-runc
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-downgrade 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-downgrade
ci/prow/e2e-gcp 905af45 link true /test e2e-gcp
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 905af45 link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-gcp-ovn 905af45 link true /test k8s-e2e-gcp-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-fips 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-fips
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift 905af45 link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. backports/unvalidated-commits Indicates that not all commits come to merged upstream PRs. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. vendor-update Touching vendor dir or related files
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.