[KEP-4639] Image Volume: remove noexec option

[bitoku]

• One-line PR description: updating ImageVolume KEP

• Issue link: https://kep.k8s.io/4639

• Other comments: discussion link in slack https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C0BP8PW9G/p1747855940240409

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @bitoku!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/enhancements 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/enhancements has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @bitoku. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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.

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.

[haircommander]

/ok-to-test
/lgtm

/cc @samuelkarp @smarterclayton

[mikebrow]

LGTM

[SergeyKanzhelev]

yes, makes sense to drop the noexec in these statements. Should we say explicitly that the Container Runtime needs to allow exec explicitly? Or we just rely on whatever behavior the runtime will do?

Perhaps create a critest to ensure that exec is allowed?

[bitoku]

@SergeyKanzhelev IMHO we don't need to ensure it because we don't say explicitly for other options.

[SergeyKanzhelev]

@SergeyKanzhelev IMHO we don't need to ensure it because we don't say explicitly for other options.

/lgtm

I think it will be useful to document that it will be mounted with exec in the API and ideally add the critest for it. But I agree that it is a default assumption here.

[SergeyKanzhelev]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bitoku, mikebrow, mrunalp, SergeyKanzhelev

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:

• keps/sig-node/OWNERS [mrunalp]

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