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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add Policy None for Topology Manager #79343

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 16, 2019
Merged

Add Policy None for Topology Manager #79343

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 16, 2019

Conversation

nolancon
Copy link

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 adds 'None' policy for Topology Manager in addition to existing 'Preferred' and 'Strict' policies. 'None' policy will be enabled by default and will do nothing, ensuring current behavior is preserved even if topology manager feature gate is enabled.
As discussed here #74411 (comment)

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-kind Indicates a PR lacks a `kind/foo` label and requires one. 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 Jun 24, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @nolancon. 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 area/kubelet sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Jun 24, 2019
@nolancon
Copy link
Author

@ConnorDoyle @derekwaynecarr @klueska

draveness
draveness reviewed Jun 24, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@draveness draveness left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/ok-to-test
/priority important-soon

pkg/kubelet/cm/topologymanager/policy_none_test.go Outdated
}
}

func TestCanAdmitPodResult2(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why there is a 2 in the function name?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Strict policy test and preferred policy test have similar functions named ''TestCanAdmitPodResult" and "TestCanAdmitPodResult1" respectively, so just following that naming convention.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think renaming it to TestPolicyNoneCanAdmitPodResult is better, and the other tests should be renamed respectively.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure, I will update all three.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed 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 Jun 24, 2019
@draveness
Copy link
Contributor

/kind node

Add Policy None for Topology Manager
2d7ac70 
Update naming of test functions.
draveness
draveness reviewed Jun 25, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@draveness draveness left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please squash the commits into one, others LGTM

@nolancon
Copy link
Author

/retest

mattjmcnaughton
mattjmcnaughton approved these changes Jun 25, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Modulo, I think I may be missing where we actually make it the default? Or is that going to come later?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 25, 2019
@nolancon
Copy link
Author

nolancon commented Jul 2, 2019

/lgtm

Modulo, I think I may be missing where we actually make it the default? Or is that going to come later?

Yes, #73580 will be updated to make None the default policy.

@nolancon nolancon mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2019
Closed
@nolancon
Copy link
Author

nolancon commented Jul 3, 2019

/assign @ConnorDoyle

@nolancon nolancon mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2019
Merged
@lmdaly
Copy link
Contributor

lmdaly commented Jul 10, 2019

@derekwaynecarr @ConnorDoyle could you take a look at this when you get a chance?

@lmdaly lmdaly mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2019
Closed
moshe010
moshe010 reviewed Jul 15, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkg/kubelet/cm/topologymanager/policy_none.go
}

func (p *nonePolicy) Name() string {
return string(PolicyNone)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you can remove the string as PolicyNone already a string

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I approved to move this along, but @nolancon if you could clean this up in a follow on. Thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sjenning, I clean it in this PR #80235

@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nolancon, sjenning

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 Jul 16, 2019
@sjenning
Copy link
Contributor

/kind feature

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. and removed needs-kind Indicates a PR lacks a `kind/foo` label and requires one. labels Jul 16, 2019
@sjenning sjenning mentioned this pull request Jul 16, 2019
Merged
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 4197ada into kubernetes:master Jul 16, 2019
@nolancon nolancon mentioned this pull request Aug 26, 2019
Closed
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sjenning sjenning sjenning left review comments

@moshe010 moshe010 moshe010 left review comments

@draveness draveness draveness left review comments

@mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton approved these changes

@krmayankk krmayankk Awaiting requested review from krmayankk

@Random-Liu Random-Liu Awaiting requested review from Random-Liu

Assignees

@ConnorDoyle ConnorDoyle

@mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/kubelet cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
8 participants
@nolancon @k8s-ci-robot @draveness @lmdaly @sjenning @moshe010 @mattjmcnaughton @ConnorDoyle