OCPBUGS-6030: Rebase onto kube v1.26#1432
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Marko Mudrinić <mudrinic.mare@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Marko Mudrinić <mudrinic.mare@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Marko Mudrinić <mudrinic.mare@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Marko Mudrinić <mudrinic.mare@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Marko Mudrinić <mudrinic.mare@gmail.com>
The resource.k8s.io/ClaimTemplate only gets referenced by name, therefore the changes to the core API are limited.
These tests print a v1.Pod with Sprintf, which includes the new field even when it is empty.
This adds a new resource.k8s.io API group with v1alpha1 as version. It contains four new types: resource.ResourceClaim, resource.ResourceClass, resource.ResourceClaimTemplate, and resource.PodScheduling.
This is needed for "kubectl get". It depends on the generated swagger docs.
This is the result of cd staging/src/k8s.io/api && UPDATE_COMPATIBILITY_FIXTURE_DATA=true go test ./...
This is in response to review feedback. Checking for valid node names and the set property catches programming mistakes in the components that have write permission.
It's new code, so we should follow the latest recommendations for logging.
This will be used for different individual packages. A separate repo is better than reusing something like component-helpers because dependencies will be different.
This is similar to the support code for generic ephemeral inline volumes. Differences: - to avoid stuttering, the functions are just resourceclaim.Name and resourceclaim.IsForPod - resourceclaim.Name returns the right name for both cases (template and reference), which will simplify some code Other helper functions check some simple status conditions.
The controller uses the exact same logic as the generic ephemeral inline volume controller, just for inline ResourceClaimTemplate -> ResourceClaim. In addition, it supports removal of pods from the ReservedFor field when those pods are known to not need the claim anymore. At the moment, only this special case is supported. Removal of arbitrary objects would imply granting full read access to all types to determine whether a) an object is gone and b) if the current incarnation is the one which is listed in ReservedFor. This may get added later.
Move events command to top level
update documentation after code freeze
…s-beta-enable-e2e-test Add e2e test for job pod failure policy used to match pod disruption
due to redesign where we changed from new endpoint to /apis. The expected error was not also changed. Caught by e2e tests when feature enabled. Should have been caught by unit test first but it was implemented without root /apis. Unit test also fixed
so that aggregated-apiservers can also take advantage. discovered by e2e tests with feature enabled
some subresources were not properly included in the array due to pointers becoming stale over a resize
|
/test e2e-gcp |
|
/retest-required |
4 similar comments
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest-required |
soltysh
left a comment
soltysh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/approve
/remove-label backports/unvalidated-commits
/label backports/validated-commits
openshift-ci
Bot
added
backports/validated-commits
|
/test e2e-gcp |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: deads2k, sanchezl, soltysh The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
approved
|
/test e2e-aws-csi |
|
/test e2e-gcp |
|
/test e2e-aws-ovn-cgroupsv2 |
|
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips /test e2e-aws-ovn-crun |
|
/test e2e-aws-ovn-cgroupsv2 |
|
/test e2e-aws-csi |
|
/retest-required |
|
/test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade |
|
/test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade |
|
@sanchezl: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
Based on the discussion with TRT the failure from this test is not related with this bump, but rather a pre-existing problem that's being tracked separately |
|
@soltysh: Overrode contexts on behalf of soltysh: ci/prow/e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@sanchezl: Some pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: The following pull requests linked via external trackers have not merged:
These pull request must merge or be unlinked from the Jira bug in order for it to move to the next state. Once unlinked, request a bug refresh with Jira Issue OCPBUGS-6030 has not been moved to the MODIFIED state. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
20 participants
Rebase onto
kubernetes/kubernetes@v1.26.0.Carry patch tracking sheet.
What's new? Kubernetes Removals, Deprecations, and Major Changes in 1.26.