k8s: Bump k8s libraries to v0.30.0 #11840

RamLavi · 2024-05-02T12:32:56Z

What this PR does

This PR bumps k8s vendor to v0.30.0 on go.mod files.
It also performs needed changes in order to comply with the new vendor libraries.

Note: This PR follows the update-k8s-dependencies. manual.

Fixes #

Why we need it and why it was done in this way

The following tradeoffs were made:

The following alternatives were considered:

Links to places where the discussion took place:

Special notes for your reviewer

Checklist

This checklist is not enforcing, but it's a reminder of items that could be relevant to every PR.
Approvers are expected to review this list.

Design: A design document was considered and is present (link) or not required
PR: The PR description is expressive enough and will help future contributors
Code: Write code that humans can understand and Keep it simple
Refactor: You have left the code cleaner than you found it (Boy Scout Rule)
Upgrade: Impact of this change on upgrade flows was considered and addressed if required
Testing: New code requires new unit tests. New features and bug fixes require at least on e2e test
Documentation: A user-guide update was considered and is present (link) or not required. You want a user-guide update if it's a user facing feature / API change.
Community: Announcement to kubevirt-dev was considered

Release note

Bump k8s deps to 0.30.0

pkg/virt-api/api.go

xpivarc · 2024-05-02T13:09:08Z

pkg/virt-controller/leaderelectionconfig/config.go

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ func DefaultLeaderElectionConfiguration() Configuration {
 		LeaseDuration: metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultLeaseDuration},
 		RenewDeadline: metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultRenewDeadline},
 		RetryPeriod:   metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultRetryPeriod},
-		ResourceLock:  resourcelock.EndpointsLeasesResourceLock,
+		ResourceLock:  resourcelock.LeasesResourceLock,


See here. Looks like that EndpointsLeasesResourceLock is deprecated.

But for some reason the virt-controller endpoint is gone... trying to figure out why

Well evidently this change made it so that the leader info is kept on the lease.
Fixed accordingly.
Added a comment on the commit desc.

Thanks, makes sense.

xpivarc · 2024-05-02T13:10:53Z

staging/src/kubevirt.io/client-go/go.mod

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
 module kubevirt.io/client-go

-go 1.21
+go 1.22.0


I think I saw a runtime log saying that it needed it.. will try to remove it back and see if I get it again.

go: module ./staging/src/kubevirt.io/client-go requires go >= 1.22.0; switching to go1.22.2

Added a comment on the commit desc.

oshoval · 2024-05-02T13:20:04Z

api/openapi-spec/swagger.json

-       "description": "A selector to restrict the list of returned objects by their fields. Defaults to everything.",
-       "name": "fieldSelector",
-       "in": "query"
+       "$ref": "#/parameters/fieldSelector-xIcQKXFG"


swagger seems wrong

hmm, sure looks odd. I counted about 19 of these. make apidoc passes. still checking..

I tend to think it's OK. See here .
When I look at the output with the IDE, I don't see an issue though admittedly I am no expert.
@oshoval - WDYT? Does the output look OK to you now?

If IDE parse it then it sounds good
I am not familiar with it, better to ask someone who does
thanks

RamLavi · 2024-05-07T04:29:52Z

/retest-required

jean-edouard

/approve

kubevirt-bot · 2024-05-07T12:36:05Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jean-edouard

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [jean-edouard]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

RamLavi · 2024-06-05T16:37:23Z

we broke the streak!

removing hold
/hold cancel

trying again
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring

RamLavi · 2024-06-06T07:23:47Z

we broke the streak!

removing hold /hold cancel

trying again /test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring

pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring failed, but on a different test.

RamLavi · 2024-06-06T07:40:59Z

/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring

fossedihelm · 2024-06-06T08:24:25Z

tests/monitoring/component_monitoring.go

+			if !errors.IsAlreadyExists(err) {
+				Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+			}


Suggested change

if !errors.IsAlreadyExists(err) {

Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())

}

Expect(err).To(Or(MatchError(errors.IsAlreadyExists, "IsAlreadyExists"), Not(HaveOccurred())))

I would align the code also in lines 195-197

My bad:

Expect(err).To(Or(Not(HaveOccurred(), MatchError(errors.IsAlreadyExists, "IsAlreadyExists"))))

@RamLavi I think you have to change the Expect as I suggested before retest

oh I missed that. you're right. will change.

Changed to:

Expect(err).To(Or(Not(HaveOccurred()), MatchError(errors.IsAlreadyExists, "IsAlreadyExists")))

RamLavi · 2024-06-06T12:12:29Z

/retest

RamLavi · 2024-06-09T06:34:40Z

/retest

bumping of leader election added lease. Since the lease controlled by the role-binding on a namespave level, in order to recreate a VirtOperatorRESTErrorsBurst alert firing, both the role-binding and the cluster-role-binding need to be temporarily removed. Signed-off-by: Ram Lavi <ralavi@redhat.com>

RamLavi · 2024-06-09T10:23:36Z

/test pull-kubevirt-unit-test-arm64
looks like a flake

fossedihelm · 2024-06-10T05:10:08Z

/lgtm
/hold
@oshoval @xpivarc @lyarwood @jean-edouard @Barakmor1 Since you commented, would you mind having another look and unhold in case? Thank you

kubevirt-commenter-bot · 2024-06-10T05:10:13Z

Required labels detected, running phase 2 presubmits:
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-windows2016
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-kind-sriov
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-ipv6-sig-network
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.28-sig-network
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.28-sig-storage
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.28-sig-compute
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.28-sig-operator
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-network
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-storage
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-compute
/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-operator

oshoval · 2024-06-10T07:15:09Z

Did you take a look on those #11840 (comment) ?
Just some cosmetics, doesnt merit hold, but nice to have
thanks

RamLavi · 2024-06-10T07:38:22Z

Did you take a look on those #11840 (comment) ? Just some cosmetics, doesn't merit hold, but nice to have thanks

Hey @oshoval , thanks for the heads up. I prefer not to hold the PR for this specific change at this point.

xpivarc

There is one more thing that I am not sure about. The first commit could be split but no requirement

xpivarc · 2024-06-10T08:01:20Z

pkg/virt-api/api.go

@@ -786,7 +786,7 @@ func (app *virtAPIApp) Compose() {
 func (app *virtAPIApp) ConfigureOpenAPIService() {
 	config := openapi.CreateConfig()
 	config.GetDefinitions = v12.GetOpenAPIDefinitions
-	spec, err := builderv3.BuildOpenAPISpecFromRoutes(restfuladapter.AdaptWebServices(restful.RegisteredWebServices()), config)
+	spec, err := builder.BuildOpenAPISpecFromRoutes(restfuladapter.AdaptWebServices(restful.RegisteredWebServices()), config)


Why do we roll back?

Once I bumped the k8s version there was a version inconsistency, and config (of type *common.Config, created by openapi.CreateConfig()) was no longer of the appropriate type (*common.OpenAPIV3Config).

They moved the config to the v3 API.

Anyways per your question - the reason is I thought it would be the least change to move to the old function to keep consistency, as changing to builderv3 will result in other bigger changes.

But if you think that we should bump swagger to v3 as well then we can do that.

xpivarc · 2024-06-10T08:01:39Z

pkg/virt-controller/leaderelectionconfig/config.go

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ func DefaultLeaderElectionConfiguration() Configuration {
 		LeaseDuration: metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultLeaseDuration},
 		RenewDeadline: metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultRenewDeadline},
 		RetryPeriod:   metav1.Duration{Duration: DefaultRetryPeriod},
-		ResourceLock:  resourcelock.EndpointsLeasesResourceLock,
+		ResourceLock:  resourcelock.LeasesResourceLock,


Thanks, makes sense.

RamLavi · 2024-06-10T08:13:05Z

There is one more thing that I am not sure about. The first commit could be split but no requirement

I split it at the time to be more readable but eventually we must squash because the changes don't compile otherwise..

Signed-off-by: Ram Lavi <ralavi@redhat.com>

kubevirt-bot · 2024-06-10T19:52:41Z

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

kubevirt-bot · 2024-06-10T19:52:44Z

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at it, you'll need to add a 'DCO signoff' to your commits.

📝 Please follow instructions in the contributing guide to update your commits with the DCO

Full details of the Developer Certificate of Origin can be found at developercertificate.org.

The list of commits missing DCO signoff:

d45f13c TBD use openapi v3

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.

kubevirt-bot · 2024-06-10T19:52:47Z

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-sigs/prow repository.

kubevirt-bot · 2024-06-10T20:35:21Z

@RamLavi: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-kubevirt-e2e-kind-1.27-vgpu	`f87f7cc`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-kind-1.27-vgpu`
pull-kubevirt-unit-test-arm64	`971d773`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-unit-test-arm64`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-arm64	`971d773`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-arm64`
pull-kubevirt-conformance-arm64	`971d773`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-conformance-arm64`
pull-kubevirt-unit-test	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-unit-test`
pull-kubevirt-build	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-build`
pull-kubevirt-build-arm64	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-build-arm64`
pull-kubevirt-fossa	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-fossa`
pull-kubevirt-client-python	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-client-python`
pull-kubevirt-generate	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-generate`
pull-kubevirt-goveralls	`971d773`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-goveralls`
pull-kubevirt-verify-go-mod	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-verify-go-mod`
pull-kubevirt-prom-rules-verify	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-prom-rules-verify`
pull-kubevirt-check-unassigned-tests	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-check-unassigned-tests`
pull-kubevirt-apidocs	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-apidocs`
pull-kubevirt-code-lint	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-code-lint`
pull-kubevirt-manifests	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-manifests`
pull-kubevirt-check-tests-for-flakes	`971d773`	link	false	`/test pull-kubevirt-check-tests-for-flakes`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute-migrations	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute-migrations`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-monitoring`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute-serial	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute-serial`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-network	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-network`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-storage	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-storage`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-compute`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-operator	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.30-sig-operator`
pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-performance	`971d773`	link	true	`/test pull-kubevirt-e2e-k8s-1.29-sig-performance`

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.

kubevirt-bot added dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. size/XXL labels May 2, 2024

kubevirt-bot requested review from akalenyu, alicefr, awels, kbidarkar, machadovilaca, oshoval and rthallisey May 2, 2024 12:33

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch from 13af120 to b4a4ae9 Compare May 2, 2024 12:58

xpivarc reviewed May 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

oshoval reviewed May 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch from b4a4ae9 to 00b0bf3 Compare May 5, 2024 12:57

kubevirt-bot added the sig/network label May 5, 2024

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch 3 times, most recently from 8de6611 to f97cee5 Compare May 6, 2024 17:49

jean-edouard reviewed May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

kubevirt-bot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels May 7, 2024

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch from 732fe87 to 54d5151 Compare June 5, 2024 12:19

fossedihelm reviewed Jun 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch from 54d5151 to d289469 Compare June 6, 2024 08:49

RamLavi force-pushed the bump_k8s_vendor_v0.30.0 branch from d289469 to b6da1a9 Compare June 9, 2024 08:37

kubevirt-bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Jun 10, 2024

xpivarc reviewed Jun 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

RamLavi added 2 commits June 10, 2024 14:36

TBD use openapi v3

d45f13c

[TBD] pkg/util/openapi: Bump to v3

971d773

Signed-off-by: Ram Lavi <ralavi@redhat.com>

kubevirt-bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot added dco-signoff: no Indicates the PR's author has not DCO signed all their commits. and removed dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. labels Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 10, 2024

fossedihelm mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2024

k8s: Bump k8s libraries to v0.30.0 #12097

Merged

8 tasks

k8s: Bump k8s libraries to v0.30.0 #11840

Are you sure you want to change the base?

k8s: Bump k8s libraries to v0.30.0 #11840

Conversation

RamLavi commented May 2, 2024 • edited

What this PR does

Why we need it and why it was done in this way

Special notes for your reviewer

Checklist

Release note

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi May 5, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi May 5, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi May 6, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi May 5, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi commented May 7, 2024

jean-edouard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kubevirt-bot commented May 7, 2024

RamLavi commented Jun 5, 2024

RamLavi commented Jun 6, 2024 • edited

RamLavi commented Jun 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi Jun 9, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi commented Jun 6, 2024

RamLavi commented Jun 9, 2024

RamLavi commented Jun 9, 2024

fossedihelm commented Jun 10, 2024 • edited

kubevirt-commenter-bot commented Jun 10, 2024

oshoval commented Jun 10, 2024

RamLavi commented Jun 10, 2024

xpivarc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RamLavi commented Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot commented Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot commented Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot commented Jun 10, 2024

kubevirt-bot commented Jun 10, 2024

RamLavi commented May 2, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi May 5, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi May 5, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi May 6, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi May 5, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi commented Jun 6, 2024 •

edited

RamLavi Jun 9, 2024 •

edited

fossedihelm commented Jun 10, 2024 •

edited