-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41.6k
Add validation options for static pod #135031
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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-sigs/prow repository. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: yuanwang04 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/cc @SergeyKanzhelev |
|
@yuanwang04: 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
| return true, pod, err | ||
| } | ||
| if errs := validation.ValidatePodCreate(newPod, validation.PodValidationOptions{}); len(errs) > 0 { | ||
| opts := podutil.GetValidationOptionsFromPodSpecAndMeta(&newPod.Spec, nil, &newPod.ObjectMeta, nil) |
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.
For static pods, PodValidationOptions will take effect when creating the mirror pod.
If we previously passed an empty PodValidationOptions, it means that all its options were false (the zero value for bool types). This also implies that creating a static pod would bypass all relevant API field validations until it creates the mirror pod. Will this affect the restart rules functionality?
This seems like a reasonable bug fix, but I'm concerned that this fix might break some existing user behaviors. It affects not only the validation of restart rules but also the validation of other feature gate-related API fields.
If the kubelet runs in standalone mode, then these pods will not undergo validation for these feature gate-related API fields. I'm not sure if any users rely on this use case...
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
Fixes #135030 allowing validation options for static pods. The empty validation options disallowed restart rules, and other features for static pods.
Which issue(s) this PR is related to:
Fixes #135030
kubernetes/enhancements#5307
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: