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

OCPBUGS-23094: Fix commit label for commits #41

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 14, 2023
Merged

OCPBUGS-23094: Fix commit label for commits #41

merged 1 commit into from Nov 14, 2023

Conversation

nrb
Copy link

@nrb nrb commented Nov 13, 2023

These commits were originally in the #35 PR, but were lost due to missing the UPSTREAM label.

Added the label and squashed the commits together.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added jira/severity-critical Referenced Jira bug's severity is critical for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Nov 13, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@nrb: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-23094, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.15.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.15.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @jianli-wei

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

These commits were originally in the #35 PR, but were lost due to missing the UPSTREAM label.

Added the label and squashed the commits together.

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.

@Fedosin @abhinavdahiya @nrb
UPSTREAM: <carry>: Reuse instance-groups for internal load balancers
49f5389 
Based on docs for internal loadbalancer here [1], backend services [2]
and instances in instance-groups [3], following restrictions apply:

- Internal LB can load balance to VMs in same region, but different
  subnets
- Instance groups for the backend service must contain instance of
  the same subnet
- An instance can only belong to one load balanced instance group
- It is probably useful use-case to have nodes for the cluster belong
  to more than one subnet. And the current setup fails to create an
  internal load balancer with nodes in multiple subnets.

This change finds pre-existing instance-groups that ONLY contain
instances that belong to the cluster, uses them for the backend
service. And only ensures instance-groups for remaining ones.

[1] https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing/docs/internal
[2] https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing/docs/backend-service#restrictions_and_guidance
[3] https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/instance-groups/creating-groups-of-unmanaged-instances#addinstances

Co-authored-by: Abhinav Dahiya <abhinav.dahiya@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nolan Brubaker <nolan@nbrubaker.com>
@JoelSpeed
Copy link

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 13, 2023
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 13, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: JoelSpeed

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 13, 2023
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 13, 2023

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

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-ovn-ccm 49f5389 link false /test e2e-gcp-ovn-ccm

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.

@jianli-wei
Copy link

/label qe-approved

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR label Nov 14, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@nrb: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-23094, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.15.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.15.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @jianli-wei

In response to this:

These commits were originally in the #35 PR, but were lost due to missing the UPSTREAM label.

Added the label and squashed the commits together.

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.

@JoelSpeed
Copy link

/label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only

This is a regression that we introduced when rebasing onto 1.28. These changes have already existed in the payload and have been there for some time. There should be no issue with the payload tests by re-introducing this since the payload doesn't rely on any private GCP cluster anyway

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the acknowledge-critical-fixes-only Indicates if the issuer of the label is OK with the policy. label Nov 14, 2023
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit bf2588a into openshift:master Nov 14, 2023
5 of 6 checks passed
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@nrb: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-23094: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-23094 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

These commits were originally in the #35 PR, but were lost due to missing the UPSTREAM label.

Added the label and squashed the commits together.

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.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

This PR has been included in build ose-gcp-cloud-controller-manager-container-v4.15.0-202311141309.p0.gbf2588a.assembly.stream for distgit ose-gcp-cloud-controller-manager.
All builds following this will include this PR.

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link

Fix included in accepted release 4.15.0-0.nightly-2023-11-15-130744

@damdo
Copy link
Member

damdo commented Apr 12, 2024

/cherry-pick release-4.14

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@damdo: #41 failed to apply on top of branch "release-4.14":

Applying: UPSTREAM: <carry>: Reuse instance-groups for internal load balancers
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	providers/gce/gce.go
M	providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
M	vendor/k8s.io/cloud-provider-gcp/providers/gce/gce.go
M	vendor/k8s.io/cloud-provider-gcp/providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging vendor/k8s.io/cloud-provider-gcp/providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in vendor/k8s.io/cloud-provider-gcp/providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
Auto-merging vendor/k8s.io/cloud-provider-gcp/providers/gce/gce.go
Auto-merging providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in providers/gce/gce_loadbalancer_internal.go
Auto-merging providers/gce/gce.go
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
Patch failed at 0001 UPSTREAM: <carry>: Reuse instance-groups for internal load balancers
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.14

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jianli-wei jianli-wei Awaiting requested review from jianli-wei

@racheljpg racheljpg Awaiting requested review from racheljpg

@RadekManak RadekManak Awaiting requested review from RadekManak

Assignees

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed

Labels
acknowledge-critical-fixes-only Indicates if the issuer of the label is OK with the policy. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/severity-critical Referenced Jira bug's severity is critical for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
9 participants
@nrb @openshift-ci-robot @JoelSpeed @jianli-wei @openshift-bot @openshift-merge-robot @damdo @openshift-cherrypick-robot @Fedosin