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.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

馃尡 ClusterClass: fix some nits in the topology reconciler #5759

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 30, 2021
Merged

馃尡 ClusterClass: fix some nits in the topology reconciler #5759

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 30, 2021

Conversation

sbueringer
Copy link
Member

@sbueringer sbueringer commented Nov 30, 2021 •
edited

Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com

What this PR does / why we need it:
Just fixes some nits in the Cluster topology implementation (Nope I didn't spellcheck manually :), I just ran Intellij / Analyze over the whole package)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 30, 2021
sbueringer
sbueringer commented Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
controllers/topology/current_state.go Outdated
@@ -117,6 +117,13 @@ func (r *ClusterReconciler) getCurrentControlPlaneState(ctx context.Context, clu
if err != nil {
return nil, errors.Wrapf(err, "failed to get InfrastructureMachineTemplate for %s", tlog.KObj{Obj: res.Object})
}
// FIXME(TBD) should we do this? If yes, we should do the same for the MD templates
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

TBD: I saw that we check for the label on the InfraCluster and ControlPlane. Do we want to do this for the other templates too?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have objections, but let's move to a separate issue given that this is not a nit?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point, removed from this PR

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#5760

sbueringer
sbueringer commented Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
controllers/topology/clusterclass_controller_test.go
@@ -265,11 +265,3 @@ func isOwnerReferenceEqual(a, b metav1.OwnerReference) bool {
return true
}

func ownerRefereceTo(obj client.Object) metav1.OwnerReference {
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Turns out we had two of those :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I remember this. I think it was because the 2 PRs that were adding this functions were in pipeline at the same time. :)

@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-cluster-topology-reconciler-nits branch from f08815a to 656ab3f Compare November 30, 2021 18:16
sbueringer
sbueringer commented Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
controllers/topology/reconcile_state.go
@@ -269,15 +269,15 @@ func (r *ClusterReconciler) reconcileMachineDeployments(ctx context.Context, s *
func (r *ClusterReconciler) createMachineDeployment(ctx context.Context, md *scope.MachineDeploymentState) error {
log := tlog.LoggerFrom(ctx).WithMachineDeployment(md.Object)

ctx, _ = log.WithObject(md.InfrastructureMachineTemplate).Into(ctx)
if err := r.reconcileReferencedTemplate(ctx, reconcileReferencedTemplateInput{
infraCtx, _ := log.WithObject(md.InfrastructureMachineTemplate).Into(ctx)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm fine with keeping the old version, but it just seemed not ideal to me to stack loggers in the context on the "same level" (I realize it's a regular pattern when traversing deeper into a call stack).

With the previous code the context would have:

  • parent loggers
  • a logger for infra machine
  • a logger for bootstrap

It's not really a problem as the last one is used.

fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini reviewed Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm pending split of label check into a separated issue

controllers/topology/current_state.go Outdated
@@ -117,6 +117,13 @@ func (r *ClusterReconciler) getCurrentControlPlaneState(ctx context.Context, clu
if err != nil {
return nil, errors.Wrapf(err, "failed to get InfrastructureMachineTemplate for %s", tlog.KObj{Obj: res.Object})
}
// FIXME(TBD) should we do this? If yes, we should do the same for the MD templates
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have objections, but let's move to a separate issue given that this is not a nit?

@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-cluster-topology-reconciler-nits branch from 656ab3f to 821a3ec Compare November 30, 2021 18:23
@ykakarap
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM pending lint fix.

@sbueringer Thanks for fixing my typos 馃槄.

@sbueringer
ClusterClass: fix some nits in the topology reconciler
8e22a8e 
Signed-off-by: Stefan B眉ringer buringerst@vmware.com
@sbueringer sbueringer force-pushed the pr-cluster-topology-reconciler-nits branch from 821a3ec to 8e22a8e Compare November 30, 2021 19:38
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

sbueringer commented Nov 30, 2021 •
edited

LGTM pending lint fix.

@sbueringer Thanks for fixing my typos 馃槄.

Ups, lint issue fixed. Thx!

I'm still using Intellij with an active spell checker (with a large dictionary of custom added words) so sooner or later I'm picking up most of them :)

@ykakarap
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 30, 2021
fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini reviewed Nov 30, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 30, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 9f83c78 into kubernetes-sigs:main Nov 30, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.1 milestone Nov 30, 2021
@sbueringer sbueringer deleted the pr-cluster-topology-reconciler-nits branch December 1, 2021 08:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left review comments

@killianmuldoon killianmuldoon Awaiting requested review from killianmuldoon

@ykakarap ykakarap Awaiting requested review from ykakarap

Assignees

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

@ykakarap ykakarap

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.1
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@sbueringer @ykakarap @k8s-ci-robot @fabriziopandini