-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.8k
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
Improvements to excess IP release handshake #18296
Improvements to excess IP release handshake #18296
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks a ton! Unfortunately this approach seems to introduce a data race.
55ee370
to
0c8953f
Compare
* Fix for blocked state transition from ready-for-release to released * Fix for unnecessary updates between agent and operator during handshake Signed-off-by: Hemanth Malla <hemanth.malla@datadoghq.com>
0c8953f
to
fed1226
Compare
crdAllocator.Allocate() aquires lock on allocator first and then on nodestore. But updateLocalNodeResource() acquires locks in the opposite order. This commit releases nodestore lock before acquiring allocator lock to avoid potential deadlocks due to inconsistent lock ordering. Signed-off-by: Hemanth Malla <hemanth.malla@datadoghq.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome! This looks much cleaner than before. Thanks a ton!
/ci-eks |
/test-runtime |
Not running the full CI suite, as the none of the CRD-backed IPAM modes (eni, aks, plain crd) are covered by Jenkins at all. Once runtime is green, I think we can safely merge this. |
/ci-aks Edit: This workflow apparently was disabled. https://github.com/cilium/cilium/actions/workflows/conformance-aks.yaml |
Marking this ready to merge. As mentioned above, the code modified by this PR is not active in any currently enabled test suite except Ideally we had more coverage for the IP release feature as discussed in the last community meeting, but that should not block this bug fix from getting merged. |
Follow up from #17939