-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.7k
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
e2e_node: Skip dynamic config tests when the feature is disabled #106263
Conversation
DKC is being removed and we don't want it to continue flaking the rest of our tests. Lets disable them when dkc is disabled rather than hard failing. This fits more in line with our other E2Es, and reduces the maintenance load in test-infra.
/sig node |
/retest |
IIUC the feature should be removed under 1.23, so probably we should just start to delete the relevant code. @SergeyKanzhelev @endocrimes WDT? |
@cynepco3hahue we're currently marked for removal in 1.24 (https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-node/281-dynamic-kubelet-configuration/kep.yaml#L37) - Iirc the deprecation didn't land fast enough for 1.21 to remove in 1.23 |
/lgtm |
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.
/triage accepted
/priority important-longterm
/lgtm
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ehashman, endocrimes 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
DKC is being removed and we don't want it to continue flaking the rest of our tests. To avoid breaking test suites that don't explicitly exclude them, lets also skip them when the feature is disabled. This fits more in line with our other E2Es, and reduces the maintenance load in test-infra.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
/cc @SergeyKanzhelev @cynepco3hahue