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

podtopologyspread: scheduler queueing hints #122195

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 18, 2023

Conversation

nayihz
Copy link
Contributor

@nayihz nayihz commented Dec 6, 2023

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #
Part of #118893

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

kube-scheduler implements scheduling hints for the PodTopologySpread plugin.
The scheduling hints allow the scheduler to retry scheduling a Pod
that was previously rejected by the PodTopologySpread plugin if create/delete/update a related Pod or a node which matches the toplogyKey.

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


@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. labels Dec 6, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Please note that we're already in Test Freeze for the release-1.29 branch. This means every merged PR will be automatically fast-forwarded via the periodic ci-fast-forward job to the release branch of the upcoming v1.29.0 release.

Fast forwards are scheduled to happen every 6 hours, whereas the most recent run was: Tue Dec 5 22:11:44 UTC 2023.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Dec 6, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

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 k8s-ci-robot added needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Dec 6, 2023
Copy link
Member

@sanposhiho sanposhiho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/assign
/ok-to-test

@nayihz Let me know when it's ready to review.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. label Dec 6, 2023
@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 Dec 6, 2023
@nayihz nayihz marked this pull request as ready for review December 6, 2023 13:19
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 6, 2023
@nayihz
Copy link
Contributor Author

nayihz commented Dec 6, 2023

Pls help me to ensure the logic is correct. Then I will add some unit tests. @sanposhiho

@nayihz
Copy link
Contributor Author

nayihz commented Dec 9, 2023

Unit tests have been added. PTAL if you have time. Thanks. @sanposhiho

Copy link
Member

@sanposhiho sanposhiho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Thanks.
@kubernetes/sig-scheduling-approvers Anyone please take a look. The bot seems have a preference to assign me for /approve 😓

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 17, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 17, 2023
// and make these pod in scheduling schedulable or unschedulable.
{Event: framework.ClusterEvent{Resource: framework.Node, ActionType: framework.Add | framework.Delete | framework.UpdateNodeLabel}},
{Event: framework.ClusterEvent{Resource: framework.Node, ActionType: framework.Add | framework.Delete | framework.Update}, QueueingHintFn: pl.isSchedulableAfterNodeChange},
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we need to add a TODO here to change Update to UpdateNodeLabel again, after #122306 fixed?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, either is actually fine though, let's just keep it as it is, since we already have a comment in isSchedulableAfterNodeChange. If isSchedulableAfterNodeChange is re-implemented properly after #122306, an implementor or reviewer should just notice that they can change framework.Update to framework.UpdateNodeLabel.

Copy link
Member

@sanposhiho sanposhiho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 17, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 38da8281e7f1f8d9341986c254428bbfab013fc7

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/approve
/retest

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, nayihz

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 Dec 18, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 9dc0dbe into kubernetes:master Dec 18, 2023
14 checks passed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.30 milestone Dec 18, 2023
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/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. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/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 Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants