Bug 1910500: Fixes CSI provisioner additional parameters

[Jayashree-panda]

Signed-off-by: Jayashree-panda jayashreepanda12345@gmail.com

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Jayashree-panda: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1910500, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "4.8.0" release, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

Details

In response to this:

Bug 1910500: Fixes CSI provisioner additional parameters

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/test-infra repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

Hi @Jayashree-panda. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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/test-infra repository.

[cloudbehl]

/bugzilla refresh
/ok-to-test

[openshift-ci-robot]

@cloudbehl: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1910500, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target release (4.8.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.8.0)
• bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @yapei

Details

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh
/ok-to-test

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/test-infra repository.

[yapei]

@Jayashree-panda launched a GCP cluster with cluster-bot and tested locally, given csidrivers and clustercsidrivers below

# oc get clustercsidrivers
NAME                    AGE
pd.csi.storage.gke.io   47m
# oc get csidrivers
No resources found

In Provisioner dropdown list, I didn't see pd.csi.storage.gke.io

var allitems = document.querySelectorAll("a.pf-c-dropdown__menu-item")
for(var item of allitems){
    console.log(item.innerText)
}
kubernetes.io/no-provisioner
kubernetes.io/aws-ebs
kubernetes.io/gce-pd
kubernetes.io/glusterfs
kubernetes.io/cinder
kubernetes.io/azure-file
kubernetes.io/azure-disk
kubernetes.io/quobyte
kubernetes.io/vsphere-volume
kubernetes.io/portworx-volume
kubernetes.io/scaleio

[yapei]

I think the bug is requesting to list available csi drivers in the provisioner dropdown list, in our case it should be pd.csi.storage.gke.io based on bug description and comment #1

@Jayashree-panda could you help confirm again?

[cloudbehl]

@yapei We assumed that it will be available via the oc get csidrivers list and showing all provisioner in dropdown based on that.

Need to see what's the difference between the csidrivers and clustercsidrivers api & how different they are as I know OCS uses csiDrivers API to list the registered provisioners.

@jsafrane ^^

[Madhu-1]

@yapei We assumed that it will be available via the oc get csidrivers list and showing all provisioner in dropdown based on that.

Need to see what's the difference between the csidrivers and clustercsidrivers api & how different they are as I know OCS uses csiDrivers API to list the registered provisioners.

@jsafrane ^^

AFAIK clustercsidriver is something specific to openshift to management and configuration of a CSI driver operator not available in kubernetes by default.

@jsafrane @gnufied can help here.

[jsafrane]

ClusterCSIDriver is CR for OCP CSI driver operators. CSIDriver is Kubernetes information about installed CSI drivers. In StorageClass GUI please use CSIDrivers.

[cloudbehl]

Based on @yapei : #8337 (comment)

# oc get clustercsidrivers
NAME                    AGE
pd.csi.storage.gke.io   47m
# oc get csidrivers
No resources found

@jsafrane why do we have this difference in a place where csidriver API is not giving output and clustercsidrivers has an output. Which one we should use?

[jsafrane]

Again, for console use CSIDrivers.

@bertinatto, missing CSIDriver for GCP PD sounds like a bug, can you please check?

[cloudbehl]

/assign @spadgett

[yapei]

I confirmed that console should be working well when listing CSIDrivers in Provisioner dropdown

Given these csidrivers we got from oc get csidrivers

# oc get csidrivers
NAME                   ATTACHREQUIRED   PODINFOONMOUNT   MODES        AGE
block.csi.ibm.com      true             false            Persistent   54s  (operator defined CSIDriver, added manually)
ebs.csi.aws.com        true             false            Persistent   8h  (default CSIDriver)
example.ember-csi.io   true             true             Persistent   4m37s  (operator defined CSIDriver, added manually)

All are listed in the Provisioners dropdown.

So 1910500 should be a Storage bug

[jsafrane]

Sorry about missing CSIDriver, I created https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939865

For testing, you can apply this one manually: https://github.com/openshift/gcp-pd-csi-driver/blob/master/deploy/kubernetes/base/controller/csidriver_info.yaml

[yapei]

Got it, thank you @jsafrane for reporting the bug
then adding additional parameters will be the only scope for this PR, let me test it again

[yapei]

no external link will be rendered if documentationLink is empty, is this expected? @Jayashree-panda

[yapei]

for example selecting block.csi.ibm.com or pd.csi.storage.gke.io provisioner will return

<a class="co-external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">What should I enter here?</a>

[Jayashree-panda]

@yapei Made a fix for this. PTAL!

[Jayashree-panda]

@yapei Someone else has just fixed it which has got merged! I will rebase and update.

[yapei]

@Jayashree-panda with the latest code, Additional parameters section will NOT be shown correctly

Additional parameters section is ONLY shown when kubernetes.io/no-provisioner is selected

[Jayashree-panda]

@yapei Fixed! Thanks!

[spadgett]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Jayashree-panda, spadgett

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• frontend/OWNERS [spadgett]

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

[openshift-ci-robot]

@Jayashree-panda: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

• openshift/console#8337

Bugzilla bug 1910500 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

Details

In response to this:

Bug 1910500: Fixes CSI provisioner additional parameters

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/test-infra repository.