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

[RFE] Additional Tasks #31

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

atiratree
Copy link
Contributor

@atiratree atiratree commented Dec 3, 2020

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. label Dec 3, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 3, 2020
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
task_name: virt-customize
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe we should name it pvc-virt-customize or disk-virt-customize instead for easier recognition?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hmmm, I like both. Probably disk-... is better since it does not work on any PVC, only on VM disks

@@ -39,6 +41,14 @@ spec:
description: Namespace where to create the VM. (defaults to active namespace)
default: ""
type: string
- name: sshAuthorizedKeysSecret
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not sure if we should be adding the authorized keys to the VM only in execute-in-vm task or in create-vm-from-template / virt-customize tasks as well?

Currently it is added to all 3 tasks.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@atiratree atiratree Dec 3, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The disadvantage is that the config is quite verbose since we have to specify the users too (possibly propagation policy), but the execute-in-vm task already knows the user.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would vote to add it only to create-vm-from-template - it makes maintenance of the pipelines easier if one thing is only done one way. Adding it to the other tasks would be useful only if I wanted to have a flow where I take an existing VM and add new keys into it and I dont see that as a valid use case.

labels:
task.kubevirt.io/type: virt-customize
task.kubevirt.io/category: virt-customize
name: virt-customize
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the disadvantage of this task is that it cannot be run across different namespaces. So it can change only disks in the same namespace as the pipeline is running.

the advantage is that no serviceAccount is needed.

This could be fixed by implementing a CRD and a controller, although that would be a much larger endeavor than implementing a single task. It might be probably better to include this in a CDI which already does similar things.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I dont really see a reason to run the task in a different namespace than the pvc it modifies...


This task clones PersistentVolumeClaims to target PVC by using CDI DataVolumes.

## `clone-pvc`
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this might be better to include it as a subtask of create-datavolume task. For example create-datavolume-from-pvc. Thoughts?

the advantages is that there would be less main tasks and we could reuse serviceAccount and roles of create-datavolume

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link

@suomiy: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-tests-cluster-scope 8a9881d link /test e2e-tests-cluster-scope
ci/prow/e2e-tests-namespace-scope 8a9881d link /test e2e-tests-namespace-scope

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

@atiratree atiratree force-pushed the tasksrfes branch 2 times, most recently from 21f9956 to e071527 Compare January 8, 2021 14:18
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 13, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 13, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 21, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 22, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 26, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 25, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 9, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 12, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 6, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 4, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 4, 2021
suomiy added 2 commits May 6, 2021 15:44
Signed-off-by: suomiy <suomiy@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: suomiy <suomiy@gmail.com>
suomiy added 2 commits May 6, 2021 15:44
Signed-off-by: suomiy <suomiy@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: suomiy <suomiy@gmail.com>
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: atiratree

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 6, 2021
@atiratree
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

2 similar comments
@atiratree
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@atiratree
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 8, 2021
@atiratree
Copy link
Contributor Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 10, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 10, 2021
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@atiratree: PR needs rebase.

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.

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 8, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 8, 2021
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle rotten

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Dec 8, 2021
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Dec 8, 2021
@ksimon1
Copy link
Member

ksimon1 commented Jan 3, 2022

/remove-lifecycle rotten

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Jan 3, 2022
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Apr 3, 2022
@atiratree
Copy link
Contributor Author

most of these tasks have been already implemented

@atiratree atiratree closed this Apr 4, 2022
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. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/XXL
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants