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
Feature-gate SidecarContainers code in pkg/kubelet/kuberuntime #120281
Feature-gate SidecarContainers code in pkg/kubelet/kuberuntime #120281
Conversation
/sig node |
I'll add the e2e test here instead of including it in #120269. |
880697a
to
afcb601
Compare
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd |
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd |
afcb601
to
2f2d983
Compare
/test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd |
succeeded, retest... /test pull-kubernetes-node-kubelet-serial-containerd |
This adds an e2e test to ensure that a pod should restart its containers in right order after the pod sandbox is changed.
2f2d983
to
696f84a
Compare
/hold cancel |
f := framework.NewDefaultFramework("containers-lifecycle-test-serial") | ||
f.NamespacePodSecurityEnforceLevel = admissionapi.LevelPrivileged | ||
|
||
ginkgo.It("should restart the containers in right order after the node reboot", func(ctx context.Context) { |
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.
Is this test case assuming the feature gate is disabled? Would it pass with the feature gate enabled?
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.
No it doesn't. We'll fix the case with feature gate enabled in #120269 after this.
/retest |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: dims, gjkim42, klueska, mrunalp, SergeyKanzhelev 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 |
@SergeyKanzhelev @mrunalp is the release note expressive enough and captures what need to highlight? |
@gjkim42 is there a cherry-pick already? |
@gjkim42: The following test failed, say
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. |
No it isn't yet, I'll create one to release 1.27. |
Maybe something like: |
the feature gate aspect isn't that import, clarifying it's a regression in 1.28 is helpful though. I updated the release note |
Changelog suggestion Fixed a regression around restarting init containers in the right order after a node reboot. |
…281-upstream-release-1.28 Automated cherry pick of #120281: Feature-gate SidecarContainers code in pkg/kubelet/kuberuntime
Thanks, updated it. |
I assume this will go into Sept releases correct? Or would this necessitate an OOB release? |
yes, this is on track for 1.28.2, targeting release on 2023-09-13 per https://kubernetes.io/releases/patch-releases/ |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind regression
What this PR does / why we need it:
This feature-gates SidecarContainers related code in pkg/kubelet/kuberuntime to prevent possible regressions from v1.27.
This will address the #120247 with feature gate disabled.
The case with feature gate enabled will be addressed by #120269 after this PR.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #120247
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:
/priority critical-urgent
/cc @liggitt
/cc @SergeyKanzhelev