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.

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

Fix drain logic when skipNodesWithCustomControllerPods=false, set NodeDeleteOptions correctly #5653

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2023

Conversation

BigDarkClown
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

/kind fix

What this PR does / why we need it:

In drain logic the isDaemonSet variable is set outside of pod loop. It is not correctly changed when skipNodesWithCustomControllerPods=false, so if there is at least one DS pod on the node it can be drained. This is also non-deterministic as the slice of pods is passed in random order.

Additionally the NodeDeleteOptions were not set in all appropriate places. Because of this some parts of the logic like empty candidate sorting always worked on skipNodesWithCustomControllerPods=false.

Original change: #5507

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@BigDarkClown: The label(s) kind/fix cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind fix

What this PR does / why we need it:

In drain logic the isDaemonSet variable is set outside of pod loop. It is not correctly changed when skipNodesWithCustomControllerPods=false, so if there is at least one DS pod on the node it can be drained. This is also non-deterministic as the slice of pods is passed in random order.

Additionally the NodeDeleteOptions were not set in all appropriate places. Because of this some parts of the logic like empty candidate sorting always worked on skipNodesWithCustomControllerPods=false.

Original change: #5507

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Apr 4, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/cluster-autoscaler size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 4, 2023
@BigDarkClown
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign x13n

@x13n
Copy link
Member

x13n commented Apr 4, 2023

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 4, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: BigDarkClown, x13n

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 Apr 4, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit ad86bdd into kubernetes:master Apr 4, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/cluster-autoscaler 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants