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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove KubeSchedulerConfiguration.BindTimeoutSeconds #91580

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2020
Merged

Remove KubeSchedulerConfiguration.BindTimeoutSeconds #91580

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 5, 2020

Conversation

cofyc
Copy link
Member

@cofyc cofyc commented May 29, 2020 •
edited
Loading

What type of PR is this?

Uncomment only one /kind <> line, hit enter to put that in a new line, and remove leading whitespace from that line:

/kind api-change

/kind bug
/kind cleanup
/kind deprecation
/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR removes KubeSchedulerConfiguration.BindTimeoutSeconds from v1beta1 (as for k8s 1.19 release, it's gone with v1alpha2 version). Starting from v1beta1, users can configure it via VolumeBinding plugin args.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #90958

Special notes for your reviewer:
the first commit contains auto-generated files only
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Remove `BindTimeoutSeconds` from schedule configuration `KubeSchedulerConfiguration`

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

[KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/1a55e249afccbfad7d87673073efd19dc6089ce2/keps/sig-scheduling/785-scheduler-component-config-api

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-action-required Denotes a PR that introduces potentially breaking changes that require user action. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. 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. labels May 29, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. label May 29, 2020
@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented May 29, 2020

/sig scheduling
/priority important-soon

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels May 29, 2020
@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented May 29, 2020

/assign @alculquicondor

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/test sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. labels May 29, 2020
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

Please link the KEP in the documentation section of the PR description https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-scheduling/785-scheduler-component-config-api

alculquicondor
alculquicondor reviewed May 29, 2020
View reviewed changes
test/integration/scheduler/scheduler_test.go
@@ -289,7 +287,6 @@ priorities: []
},
},
}),
scheduler.WithBindTimeoutSeconds(defaultBindTimeout),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In theory, we should be replacing this with scheduler.WithProfiles where you would pass a PluginConfig. In reality, these are integration tests. Do we have integration tests around volume binding that we have faked to run fast?

Copy link
Member Author

@cofyc cofyc Jun 1, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's strange to configure the timeout here because it verifies policy config map only

anyway, I've updated the PR to use scheduler.WithProfiles here not to change the logic

Do we have integration tests around volume binding that we have faked to run fast?

pods not using PVCs are ignored by VolumeBinding plugin and always run fast

volume-related integration tests reside in test/integration/volumescheduling pkg, but we didn't use customized volume binding timeout. maybe we can add some negative tests in the future

@fejta-bot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 29, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 1, 2020
cofyc
cofyc commented Jun 1, 2020
View reviewed changes
test/integration/util/util.go
@@ -391,7 +391,6 @@ func InitTestSchedulerWithOptions(
if policy != nil {
opts = append(opts, scheduler.WithAlgorithmSource(CreateAlgorithmSourceFromPolicy(policy, testCtx.ClientSet)))
}
opts = append([]scheduler.Option{scheduler.WithBindTimeoutSeconds(600)}, opts...)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

same as default, not necessary

@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented Jun 1, 2020

Please link the KEP in the documentation section of the PR description https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-scheduling/785-scheduler-component-config-api

updated

alculquicondor
alculquicondor reviewed Jun 2, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alculquicondor alculquicondor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

/hold
for the nit, but feel free to unhold

pkg/scheduler/scheduler_test.go Outdated
}

func TestRemoveNominatedNodeName(t *testing.T) {
func TestSetNominatedNodeName(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why change this line? or is this just coming from rebase?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

agree, keep this line unchanged

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh, it's a mistake made in resolving conflicts

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

fixed

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 2, 2020
@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Jun 2, 2020

I would suggest accumulating the docs in a WIP website PR, and point the release notes in the PR that introduced the v1beta1 config API to the location of that doc on http://kubernetes.io/

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

Done, the path should be kubernetes.io/docs/reference/scheduling/config#what-is-new kubernetes/website#21437

This was referenced Jun 2, 2020
Merged
Merged
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-action-required Denotes a PR that introduces potentially breaking changes that require user action. labels Jun 3, 2020
@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented Jun 3, 2020

IIUC, we should point the release notes in the PR that introduced the v1beta1 config API to kubernetes.io/docs/reference/scheduling/config#what-is-new?

release notes in this PR removed

@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented Jun 3, 2020

/retest

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/hold
there is some push back from sig doc

@alculquicondor alculquicondor mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2020
Merged
@puerco
Copy link
Member

puerco commented Jun 4, 2020

@alculquicondor @cofyc :
Once kubernetes/website#21437 merges, please add the URL of the reference doc to the additional documentation section in the body of the PR.

Thanks !

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

Thanks @puerco
/unhold

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 4, 2020
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

For now, let's leave a short release note here.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Jun 5, 2020
@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented Jun 5, 2020

For now, let's leave a short release note here.

Done. I guess ACTION REQUIRED is only needed in PR that removes v1alpha2 version?

@cofyc
Copy link
Member Author

cofyc commented Jun 5, 2020

/retest

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

Done. I guess ACTION REQUIRED is only needed in PR that removes v1alpha2 version?

Good point. I've requested an update to the PR author.

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/approve
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 5, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, cofyc, liggitt

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 merged commit 4e3dea8 into kubernetes:master Jun 5, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.19 milestone Jun 5, 2020
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2020
Open
@cofyc cofyc deleted the fix90958 branch September 27, 2020 10:18
@SataQiu SataQiu mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2022
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@liggitt liggitt liggitt left review comments

@alculquicondor alculquicondor alculquicondor left review comments

@derekwaynecarr derekwaynecarr Awaiting requested review from derekwaynecarr

@hex108 hex108 Awaiting requested review from hex108

Assignees

@liggitt liggitt

@alculquicondor alculquicondor

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. 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. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.19
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Remove BindTimeoutSeconds from KubeSchedulerConfiguration
6 participants
@cofyc @alculquicondor @fejta-bot @liggitt @puerco @k8s-ci-robot