Fix cAdvisorPort, 0 is a valid option

[mtaufen]

wrt #11710, this maintains the current default if nobody provides the flag, but allows explicitly passing 0.

/cc @farcaller @vishh @liggitt @antoineco @philips
/assign @liggitt @vishh

Fixes a bug with cAdvisorPort in the KubeletConfiguration that prevented setting it to 0, which is in fact a valid option, as noted in issue #11710.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@mtaufen: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: antoineco, farcaller.

Note that only kubernetes members can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

wrt #11710, this maintains the current default if nobody provides the flag, but allows explicitly passing 0.

/cc @farcaller @vishh @liggitt @antoineco @philips
/assign @liggitt @vishh

Fixes a bug with --cadvisor-port that prevented passing 0, which is in fact a valid option, as noted in issue #11710.

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.

[vishh]

/lgtm

[k8s-github-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mtaufen, vishh

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

• pkg/apis/componentconfig/OWNERS [mtaufen,vishh]

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[antoineco]

I was certain I didn't see any warning when starting kubelet with that option, is 1.6.4 affected? (can't check, on a mobile)

[mtaufen]

Flags layer on top after this defaulting step, so there's something else funny going on if you still aren't able to override with 0 via a flag.

[antoineco]

I mean, passing 0 to that flag already disables the cAdvisor service on kube 1.6.4 (which seems strange after looking at your commit).

In which situation did you hit that bug? How can you reproduce? Just curious.

[mtaufen]

You'd hit it if you were just pulling config directly out of a KubeletConfiguration object without flags; e.g. dynamic config. I didn't personally encounter this, but it's obviously a bug so it makes sense to fix it.

[mtaufen]

It seemed like people in #11710 were having trouble with the flag though.

[antoineco]

Ah right, makes sense, good that you spotted it 👏

[dchen1107]

The release team bug triage notes: The pr was approved after the code freeze because it indeed fixed a regression issue in 1.7 release based on the discuss at #11710 (comment)

cc/ @marun

[mtaufen]

re-adding label

[k8s-ci-robot]

@mtaufen: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-federation-e2e-gce	ca21da4	link	@k8s-bot pull-kubernetes-federation-e2e-gce test this

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.

[mtaufen]

@k8s-bot pull-kubernetes-federation-e2e-gce test this

[k8s-github-robot]

Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 46787, 46876, 46621, 46907, 46819)