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

Configurable Pod Process Namespace Sharing #495

Closed
verb opened this issue Oct 24, 2017 · 60 comments
Closed

Configurable Pod Process Namespace Sharing #495

verb opened this issue Oct 24, 2017 · 60 comments

Comments

@verb
Copy link
Contributor

@verb verb commented Oct 24, 2017

Feature Description

  • One-line feature description (can be used as a release note): Users can configure containers within a pod to share a common PID namespace by setting an option in the PodSpec.
  • Primary contact (assignee): @verb
  • Responsible SIGs: sig-node
  • Kubernetes Enhancement Proposal: https://git.k8s.io/enhancements/keps/sig-node/20190920-pod-pid-namespace.md
  • Link to e2e and/or unit tests:
  • Reviewer(s) - (for LGTM) recommend having 2+ reviewers (at least one from code-area OWNERS file) agreed to review. Reviewers from multiple companies preferred: @yujuhong
  • Approver (likely from SIG/area to which feature belongs): @dchen1107
  • Feature target (which target equals to which milestone):
    • Alpha release target (1.10)
    • Beta release target (1.12)
    • Stable release target (1.17)
@verb verb changed the title Configurable Pod PID Namespace Sharing Configurable per-pod PID Namespace Sharing Oct 24, 2017
@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 24, 2017

/sig node

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 24, 2017

/assign @verb

@idvoretskyi idvoretskyi added this to the 1.9 milestone Oct 24, 2017
@zacharysarah
Copy link
Contributor

@zacharysarah zacharysarah commented Nov 22, 2017

@verb 👋 Please indicate in the 1.9 feature tracking board
whether this feature needs documentation. If yes, please open a PR and add a link to the tracking spreadsheet. Thanks in advance!

@zacharysarah
Copy link
Contributor

@zacharysarah zacharysarah commented Nov 29, 2017

@verb Bump for docs ☝️

/cc @idvoretskyi

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Nov 30, 2017

@zacharysarah updated tracking, feature slips to 1.10

@verb verb changed the title Configurable per-pod PID Namespace Sharing Configurable Pod Process Namespace Sharing Jan 10, 2018
k8s-github-robot pushed a commit to kubernetes/kubernetes that referenced this issue Jan 10, 2018
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 54230, 58100, 57861, 54752). If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.

Add a feature flag for sharing process namespace between containers in a pod

**What this PR does / why we need it**:
This adds a feature flag for the feature described in kubernetes/enhancements#495.

**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 #

**Special notes for your reviewer**:
/assign @dchen1107 

**Release note**:

```release-note
NONE
```
@jberkus
Copy link
Contributor

@jberkus jberkus commented Jan 12, 2018

Hey, can you change the milestone for this to 1.10 so that the release team can track it properly? Thanks.

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Jan 15, 2018

@jberkus who, me? I don't think I can. At least, it's not listed as a bot command

@yujuhong yujuhong removed this from the v1.9 milestone Jan 16, 2018
@yujuhong yujuhong added this to the v1.10 milestone Jan 16, 2018
@idvoretskyi
Copy link
Member

@idvoretskyi idvoretskyi commented Jan 22, 2018

/kind feature

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Feb 1, 2018

This feature is on track for alpha in 1.10.

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Feb 27, 2018

Feature will be included as alpha in 1.10.

k8s-github-robot pushed a commit to kubernetes/kubernetes that referenced this issue Mar 5, 2018
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.

Add node-e2e test for ShareProcessNamespace

**What this PR does / why we need it**: Adds a node-e2e test for kubernetes/enhancements#495

**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 #59554

**Special notes for your reviewer**: This requires a feature gate to be enabled in both the kubelet and API server. I'm not sure which jenkins configs need to be updated (or if these are even still used) so I just updated a pile of them.

opened kubernetes/test-infra#7030 for https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/blob/master/jobs/config.json

**Release note**:

```release-note
NONE
```
@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

@justaugustus justaugustus commented Apr 17, 2018

@verb
Any plans for this in 1.11?

If so, can you please ensure the feature is up-to-date with the appropriate:

  • Description
  • Milestone
  • Assignee(s)
  • Labels:
    • stage/{alpha,beta,stable}
    • sig/*
    • kind/feature

cc @idvoretskyi

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.17 milestone Sep 27, 2019
@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 2, 2019

@mrbobbytables
Copy link
Member

@mrbobbytables mrbobbytables commented Oct 6, 2019

Thanks @verb!

@irvifa
Copy link
Member

@irvifa irvifa commented Oct 21, 2019

Hello @verb I'm one of the v1.17 docs shadows.
Does this enhancement for (or the work planned for v1.17) require any new docs (or modifications to existing docs)? If not, can you please update the 1.17 Enhancement Tracker Sheet (or let me know and I'll do so)

If so, just a friendly reminder we're looking for a PR against k/website (branch dev-1.17) due by Friday, November 8th, it can just be a placeholder PR at this time. Let me know if you have any questions!

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 21, 2019

@irvifa This will require a minor update of k/website to mark the feature as stable. I don't have a link to the tracker handy, so if you could update it I would appreciate it.

Ack, will open a PR against dev-1.17 by November 8.

@irvifa
Copy link
Member

@irvifa irvifa commented Oct 21, 2019

Hi @verb
Awesome, I already update the tracking sheet for you. Thanks for the quick response!

@verb verb mentioned this issue Oct 25, 2019
21 tasks
@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 25, 2019

kubernetes/kubernetes#84356 to promote to GA

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Oct 25, 2019

@annajung
Copy link
Member

@annajung annajung commented Nov 6, 2019

Hey @verb 1.17 Enhancement Shadow here! 👋 I am reaching out to check in with you to see how this enhancement is going.

Thank you for providing k/k PR, I have added the following kubernetes/kubernetes#84356 in the tracking sheet. Are there any other k/k PRs that need to be tracked as well?

Also, another friendly reminder that we're quickly approaching code freeze (Nov. 14th).

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Nov 6, 2019

@annajung Thanks for checking in. We're in good shape here. The linked k/k and k/w PRs are the only ones, and all we need is final sig-node approval.

@annajung
Copy link
Member

@annajung annajung commented Nov 13, 2019

Hi @verb , Tomorrow is code freeze for 1.17 release cycle. It looks like the k/k PRs have not been merged. We’re flagging this enhancement as At Risk in the 1.17 tracking sheet.

Do you think all necessary PRs will be merged by the EoD of the 14th (Thursday)? After that, only release-blocking issues and PRs will be allowed in the milestone with an exception.

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Nov 13, 2019

@annajung the k/k PR is in the merge pool. I think it will merge.

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Jan 30, 2020

The only remaining item for this feature is to finish removing the feature gate in 1.19.

Enhancement leads: this feature should be excluded from 1.18 and included in 1.19.

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

@palnabarun palnabarun commented Apr 29, 2020

Hi @verb, -- 1.19 Enhancements Lead here, can you confirm if the feature gate is still scheduled to be removed in 1.19?

If you do, I'll add it to the 1.19 tracking sheet (http://bit.ly/k8s-1-19-enhancements). Once the work begins please list the relevant k/k PR in this issue so it can be tracked properly. 👍


The current release schedule is:

  • Monday, April 13: Week 1 - Release cycle begins
  • Tuesday, May 19: Week 6 - Enhancements Freeze
  • Thursday, June 25: Week 11 - Code Freeze
  • Thursday, July 9: Week 14 - Docs must be completed and reviewed
  • Tuesday, August 4: Week 17 - Kubernetes v1.19.0 released

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

@palnabarun palnabarun commented Apr 29, 2020

/milestone clear

(removing this issue from v1.17 milestone since the milestone is complete)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed this from the v1.17 milestone Apr 29, 2020
@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Apr 30, 2020

@palnabarun I'm prepared to remove the feature gate, but I saw an announcement that 1.19 should avoid unnecessary backwards-incompatible changes. Could you advise on whether we should proceed with a feature gate clean up or push it to 1.20?

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

@palnabarun palnabarun commented May 14, 2020

Hi @verb

We are encouraging SIGs to push for features this cycle which do not increase end-user complexity. If removing the feature gate breaks backward compatibility, I would suggest against removing it this cycle.

However, I think discussing with the SIG would be the best way to get an answer to the question.

Thanks! 👍

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

@palnabarun palnabarun commented May 20, 2020

@verb -- Unfortunately, the deadline for the 1.19 Enhancement freeze has passed. For now, this is being removed from the milestone and 1.19 tracking sheet. If there is a need to get this in, please file an enhancement exception.

@fejta-bot
Copy link

@fejta-bot fejta-bot commented Aug 18, 2020

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@palnabarun
Copy link
Member

@palnabarun palnabarun commented Sep 1, 2020

/remove-lifecycle stale

@verb
Copy link
Contributor Author

@verb verb commented Sep 11, 2020

Looks like the PodShareProcessNamespace feature gate was removed in 1.19, anyway (#90096, @tedyu)

This feature is complete. 🎉

@verb verb closed this Sep 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet