Refine ESIPP validation logic in validation.go #44741
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
|
This change is |
k8s-github-robot
added
size/L
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
@k8s-bot kops aws e2e test this |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: MrHohn, freehan, thockin
Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:
You can indicate your approval by writing |
k8s-github-robot
added
the
approved
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Separated from #41162.
The previous ESIPP validation logic in validation.go has a huge overlap with function healthCheckNodePortUpdate in service/rest.go, in which we reject any invalid modifications on ESIPP annotations.
This PR removes the overlap, and make validation.go only check if values are legal and whether user mixes different API versions (alpha & beta).
We are indeed removing the alpha annotation support, but it is kept in the codes for the ease of transiting the same logic onto beta/GA.
/assign @thockin @freehan
Release note: