Pull hollow node images from real nodes

[lyzs90]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Details: #90833

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part of #90833

Special notes for your reviewer:

• Was considering running the hollow node on a local cluster and get it to load some images. But sadly i'm on a mac and not sure if using dockershim will be a good enough test
• Otherwise would we be able to go straight for a presubmit if this looks good?

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

@lyzs90: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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]

Hi @lyzs90. 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.

[mm4tt]

/ok-to-test

[mm4tt]

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

[mm4tt]

Nice! Let's see whether it works in the kubemark presubmit.

[mm4tt]

After thinking about it I think it will fail as the kubemark jobs haven't been migrated to containerd :(

Let's wait for the presubmit results to confirm. If so, I'll file an issue to migrate the kubemark jobs to containerd.

[mm4tt]

The kubemark job will fail due to setup issues - #97858

[mm4tt]

The setup issue should be fixed now. Let's retry the test

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

[mm4tt]

Ok, the test didn't fail, but that doesn't mean that it worked. Could you patch the #98098 to see what images are in the hollow nodes?

[lyzs90]

Ok, the test didn't fail, but that doesn't mean that it worked. Could you patch the #98098 to see what images are in the hollow nodes?

great! ok will do so

[lyzs90]

@mm4tt i can't raise a PR onto your fork. should i pull your changes here instead?

[mm4tt]

Matt Matejczyk i can't raise a PR onto your fork. should i pull your changes here instead?

Yeah, just make the same changes here as I did in my PR. These are just two lines

[lyzs90]

Matt Matejczyk i can't raise a PR onto your fork. should i pull your changes here instead?

Yeah, just make the same changes here as I did in my PR. These are just two lines

Done, you can refire the presubmit

[mm4tt]

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

@lyzs90: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big	8f48d6c9146d07297d9678ad21bc87974a423a89	link	/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

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.

[mm4tt]

Ha, it works!

Baseline:

I0115 13:34:39.359] hollow-node-22h4n                 [k8s.gcr.io/prometheus-to-sd:v0.5.0],[k8s.gcr.io/metadata-proxy:v0.1.12]

This PR:

I0118 10:38:28.105] hollow-node-229dq                 [k8s.gcr.io/kube-proxy-amd64:v1.21.0-alpha.1.117_4110ce3a8c0d7d],[gcr.io/k8s-infra-e2e-boskos-scale-16/kubemark@sha256:3457e249abd3690d07c201c7e481d736e9075d0e2617d5e350d578f04385da28 gcr.io/k8s-infra-e2e-boskos-scale-16/kubemark:oaewoa],[k8s.gcr.io/prometheus-to-sd@sha256:14666989f40bb7c896c3e775a93c6873e2b791d65bc65579f58a078b7f9a764e k8s.gcr.io/prometheus-to-sd:v0.5.0],[k8s.gcr.io/metadata-proxy@sha256:e914645f22e946bce5165737e1b244e0a296ad1f0f81a9531adc57af2780978a k8s.gcr.io/metadata-proxy:v0.1.12],[docker.io/library/busybox@sha256:c5439d7db88ab5423999530349d327b04279ad3161d7596d2126dfb5b02bfd1f docker.io/library/busybox:1.32],[k8s.gcr.io/pause@sha256:927d98197ec1141a368550822d18fa1c60bdae27b78b0c004f705f548c07814f k8s.gcr.io/pause:3.2]

Nice! In this case, let's revert the changes in start-kubemark.sh and submit this. In the meantime, I'll investigate how it works - I thought kubemark jobs were still based on docker.

[mm4tt]

Ok, I was wrong to say that kubemark jobs use docker. The default in kube-up has been changed to containerd in Jun 2020 - #91684

[mm4tt]

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: lyzs90, mm4tt

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:

• cmd/kubemark/OWNERS [mm4tt]
• pkg/kubemark/OWNERS [mm4tt]
• test/kubemark/OWNERS [mm4tt]

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

[lyzs90]

awesome, i didn't get why the last test run failed though