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

[Distroless] Convert the GCE manifests for master containers. #75624

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2019

Conversation

yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor

@yuwenma yuwenma commented Mar 23, 2019

  • Touched containers: kube-apiserver, kube-scheduler,
    kube-controller-manager.
  • Remove the shell dependencies when upstart the containers.
  • Reformat the command parameters to ["Exec", "Param1", "Param2"]
  • Remove log direction, using flags to export logs to the expected path.

Test: The manifest change is tested on a real GKE cluster (GKE sandbox). Here's the Master VM

What type of PR is this?

Uncomment only one /kind <> line, hit enter to put that in a new line, and remove leading whitespaces from that line:

/kind api-change
/kind bug

/kind cleanup

/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR is a prerequisite for switching the core master containers' base image to distroless/static.(See this kep for the reasons why we want to change to distroless/static).
Basically it removes all the shell dependencies (log redirection, using shell to kick-off a kube binary file) which isn't supported by distroless.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:


@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 23, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @yuwenma. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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 sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 23, 2019
@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Mar 23, 2019

/assign @tallclair
/assign @MaciekPytel

May I get a /ok-to-test label?

@YuZongYangHi
Copy link

hahahaa

@tallclair
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test
/cc @mwwolters @dekkagaijin

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@tallclair: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: mwwolters, dekkagaijin.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

/ok-to-test
/cc @mwwolters @dekkagaijin

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 ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 26, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 26, 2019
@yuwenma yuwenma force-pushed the gce-manifest branch 2 times, most recently from 6bc2b63 to dd84790 Compare March 26, 2019 23:28
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 26, 2019
@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Mar 27, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Mar 27, 2019

/retest

@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Mar 27, 2019

/assign mwwolters
/assign dekkagaijin

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@yuwenma: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: mwwolters, dekkagaijin.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can be assigned and that issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

/assign mwwolters
/assign dekkagaijin

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.

@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Mar 27, 2019

Gentle ping, can I get a review on this @MaciekPytel @tallclair :)

@yuwenma yuwenma force-pushed the gce-manifest branch 2 times, most recently from 6974127 to 814f81f Compare April 2, 2019 21:15
Copy link
Contributor Author

@yuwenma yuwenma left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated.

cluster/gce/manifests/kube-apiserver.manifest Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cluster/gce/gci/configure-helper.sh Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cluster/gce/gci/configure-helper.sh Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cluster/gce/gci/configure-helper.sh Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor

/approve
Looks fine, but I don't have enough context on this change to feel comfortable giving lgtm. I'll leave that to @tallclair.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: MaciekPytel, yuwenma

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, 2019
* Touched containers: kube-apiserver, kube-scheduler,
kube-controller-manager.
* Remove the shell dependencies when upstart the containers.
* Reformat the command parameters to ["Exec", "Param1", "Param2"]
@tallclair
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/cc @dims

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from dims April 4, 2019 18:29
@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, 2019
@dims
Copy link
Member

dims commented Apr 4, 2019

Looks like this is all set :)

@yuwenma
Copy link
Contributor Author

yuwenma commented Apr 4, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

@tallclair
Copy link
Member

Looks like this is all set :)

I just wanted to show off what your klog changes are enabling :)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 1c105e1 into kubernetes:master Apr 4, 2019
@dims
Copy link
Member

dims commented Apr 5, 2019

Thanks!!!!

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Apr 5, 2019

We need to revert that actually - this broke scalability tests in a way that we have only last 1.8GB of logs (i.e. it doesn't work with logrotate). We are blindless without logs.
Revert in #76190

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. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. 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.

None yet

7 participants