Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check #82652

ricardomaraschini · 2019-09-12T17:32:24Z

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
This patch moves pre-request validations to a function and implements tests for it.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

k8s-ci-robot · 2019-09-12T17:32:25Z

Welcome @ricardomaraschini!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/kubernetes 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/kubernetes has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

k8s-ci-robot · 2019-09-12T17:32:31Z

Hi @ricardomaraschini. 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.

ricardomaraschini · 2019-09-12T17:42:14Z

/assign deads2k

yliaog · 2019-09-12T20:12:18Z

/cc

deads2k · 2019-09-26T13:27:18Z

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go

@@ -691,6 +691,30 @@ func (r *Request) Stream() (io.ReadCloser, error) {
 	}
 }

+// requestPreflightCheck looks for common programmer errors on Request.
+//
+// We return an error if an attempt to POST is made using an "empty" namespace


We have cluster scoped resources like Nodes, ClusterRoles, and many others. This comment suggests that this change would prevent those from working.

Well, maybe the comment is not clear enough. What I meant is that if r.namespaceSet == true then len(r.namespace) cant be zero(empty). This logic was already there, but in a different way[1].

[1] https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/82652/files#diff-a47b7155403b5094bbe75cf02d4da303L710

@ricardomaraschini could you rewrite the comment to make that more obvious, please?

Absolutely. It is done, ptal.

deads2k · 2019-09-26T13:28:02Z

/hold

I have reservations based on comment and where I see the code plumbed: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/82652/files#r328611767

/ok-to-test

I'm expecting failures.

ricardomaraschini · 2019-09-26T14:51:50Z

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

alejandrox1

/priority important-longterm
/milestone v1.17

alejandrox1 · 2019-09-26T14:58:47Z

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go

@@ -691,6 +691,30 @@ func (r *Request) Stream() (io.ReadCloser, error) {
 	}
 }

+// requestPreflightCheck looks for common programmer errors on Request.
+//
+// We return an error if an attempt to POST is made using an "empty" namespace


@ricardomaraschini could you rewrite the comment to make that more obvious, please?

deads2k · 2019-09-27T16:01:13Z

/hold cancel

The updated comment makes it more clear. I still haven't reviewed yet, but it no longer looks dangerous.

deads2k · 2019-09-30T13:40:42Z

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go

@@ -702,19 +729,6 @@ func (r *Request) request(fn func(*http.Request, *http.Response)) error {
 		metrics.RequestLatency.Observe(r.verb, r.finalURLTemplate(), time.Since(start))
 	}()

-	if r.err != nil {


leave this in place.

I have restored this to its original place on request() instead of Do() and DoRaw(). Coming up on the next commit.

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go

deads2k · 2019-09-30T13:44:08Z

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go

+		}
+	}
+
+	if err := r.requestPreflightCheck(); err != nil {


I like the previous location for this better. The only benefit I'm seeing here is gettnig ahead of the ratelimiter, but it opens us up to having to remember this construct if we ever have another Do or DoRaw. You can make the error typed if you like, but this duplicated construct doesn't look like a net improvement..

Restored the default approach. Coming up with the next commit.

Migrated code that checks for common programmer errors to a separated function and added test coverage for it. Wrong comment stating that a typed error is returned was also removed.

ricardomaraschini · 2019-10-01T07:22:11Z

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance

ricardomaraschini · 2019-10-01T07:23:15Z

/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

deads2k · 2019-10-01T12:20:50Z

this factorization is equivalent and cleaner, thanks.

/lgtm

ricardomaraschini · 2019-10-03T08:59:07Z

/assign @alejandrox1

ricardomaraschini · 2019-10-08T13:37:52Z

/assign @wojtek-t

alejandrox1 · 2019-10-08T16:21:50Z

This looks good. Thank you @ricardomaraschini
/assign @liggitt @lavalamp
for final approval

liggitt · 2019-10-10T14:30:07Z

/approve

k8s-ci-robot · 2019-10-10T14:30:50Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, ricardomaraschini

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:

~~staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/OWNERS~~ [liggitt]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

ricardomaraschini · 2019-10-10T15:59:46Z

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

k8s-ci-robot · 2019-10-10T16:07:50Z

@ricardomaraschini: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce	`ad5fafd`	link	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

…nstruction-error Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check

k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Sep 12, 2019

k8s-ci-robot requested review from deads2k and wojtek-t September 12, 2019 17:33

k8s-ci-robot assigned deads2k Sep 12, 2019

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from yliaog September 12, 2019 20:12

deads2k reviewed Sep 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

alejandrox1 reviewed Sep 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. label Sep 26, 2019

k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.17 milestone Sep 26, 2019

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. label Sep 26, 2019

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Sep 27, 2019

deads2k reviewed Sep 30, 2019

View reviewed changes

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go Show resolved Hide resolved

deads2k reviewed Sep 30, 2019

View reviewed changes

staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/rest/request.go Show resolved Hide resolved

deads2k reviewed Sep 30, 2019

View reviewed changes

ricardomaraschini closed this Sep 30, 2019

ricardomaraschini reopened this Sep 30, 2019

Creating function for preflight check.

ad5fafd

Migrated code that checks for common programmer errors to a separated function and added test coverage for it. Wrong comment stating that a typed error is returned was also removed.

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 1, 2019

k8s-ci-robot assigned alejandrox1 Oct 3, 2019

k8s-ci-robot assigned wojtek-t Oct 8, 2019

k8s-ci-robot assigned lavalamp and liggitt Oct 8, 2019

liggitt changed the title ~~Return RequestConstructionError when appropriate.~~ Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 5ae180c into kubernetes:master Oct 10, 2019

ohsewon pushed a commit to ohsewon/kubernetes that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2019

Merge pull request kubernetes#82652 from ricardomaraschini/request-co…

767ad30

…nstruction-error Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check #82652

Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check #82652

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 12, 2019 •

edited by liggitt

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 12, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 12, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 12, 2019

yliaog commented Sep 12, 2019

deads2k Sep 26, 2019

ricardomaraschini Sep 26, 2019 •

edited

alejandrox1 Sep 26, 2019

ricardomaraschini Sep 26, 2019

deads2k commented Sep 26, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 26, 2019

alejandrox1 left a comment

alejandrox1 Sep 26, 2019

deads2k commented Sep 27, 2019

deads2k Sep 30, 2019

ricardomaraschini Sep 30, 2019

deads2k Sep 30, 2019

ricardomaraschini Sep 30, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 1, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 1, 2019

deads2k commented Oct 1, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 3, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 8, 2019

alejandrox1 commented Oct 8, 2019

liggitt commented Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 10, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 10, 2019

Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check #82652

Clean up dynamic client pre-flight check #82652

Conversation

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 12, 2019 • edited by liggitt

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 12, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 12, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 12, 2019

yliaog commented Sep 12, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ricardomaraschini Sep 26, 2019 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

deads2k commented Sep 26, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 26, 2019

alejandrox1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

deads2k commented Sep 27, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 1, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 1, 2019

deads2k commented Oct 1, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 3, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 8, 2019

alejandrox1 commented Oct 8, 2019

liggitt commented Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 10, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Oct 10, 2019

k8s-ci-robot commented Oct 10, 2019

ricardomaraschini commented Sep 12, 2019 •

edited by liggitt

ricardomaraschini Sep 26, 2019 •

edited