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

Bug 1991641: make provisioning CR status more explicit and remove the ownership on the CO #191

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 15, 2021
Merged

Bug 1991641: make provisioning CR status more explicit and remove the ownership on the CO #191

merged 2 commits into from Sep 15, 2021

Conversation

asalkeld
Copy link
Contributor

  • Make the state of a missing CR more explicit by creating a ReasonProvisioningCRNotFound.
  • Fix a code path when this was not set.
  • Remove the ownership on the clusterOperator as it was both ineffective and possibly not desired.

/cc @sadasu

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from sadasu August 16, 2021 23:49
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Aug 16, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 16, 2021

@asalkeld: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1991641, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.9.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.9.0)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (augol@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

Bug 1991641: make provisioning CR status more explicit and remove the ownership on the CO

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-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 16, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: asalkeld

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 Aug 16, 2021
@asalkeld
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

The requirements for Bugzilla bugs have changed, recalculating validity.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 6, 2021

@openshift-merge-robot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1991641, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.9.0" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

The requirements for Bugzilla bugs have changed, recalculating validity.

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-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Sep 6, 2021
@asalkeld asalkeld force-pushed the fix-co-state-no-provisioning-cr branch from 9701fec to fc5a558 Compare September 14, 2021 20:24
sadasu
sadasu reviewed Sep 14, 2021
View reviewed changes
controllers/provisioning_controller.go Outdated
if err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("unable to put %q ClusterOperator in Available state: %w", clusterOperatorName, err)
return fmt.Errorf("unable to put %q ClusterOperator in Default state: %w", clusterOperatorName, err)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we get this error msg to match what is in https://github.com/openshift/cluster-baremetal-operator/pull/191/files#diff-7ad72d08a06fe28b03a15c84289b815f693443562d0c67e6f461c7e3f5ee0707R195?

@asalkeld
Add a new status reason ReasonProvisioningCRNotFound
fdbbee9
@asalkeld
Remove the ownership on the clusterOperator
8a42ed2 
A couple of reasons for doing this
1. no other clusterOperator has an owner other than clusterVersion
2. it does not seem effective as the cvo is setting ownership to ClusterVersion
3. then condition len(co.ObjectMeta.OwnerReferences) == 0 is totally ineffective - let's just remove it
@asalkeld asalkeld force-pushed the fix-co-state-no-provisioning-cr branch from fc5a558 to 8a42ed2 Compare September 14, 2021 20:28
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor

sadasu commented Sep 14, 2021

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 14, 2021
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

2 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@asalkeld
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 15, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1991641, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "4.9.0" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@asalkeld
Copy link
Contributor Author

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Sep 15, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Sep 15, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 15, 2021

@asalkeld: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1991641, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.10.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (augol@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit a553686 into openshift:master Sep 15, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 15, 2021

@asalkeld: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 1991641 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1991641: make provisioning CR status more explicit and remove the ownership on the CO

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.

@sadasu sadasu mentioned this pull request Nov 8, 2021
Merged
@sadasu sadasu mentioned this pull request Dec 22, 2021
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sadasu sadasu sadasu left review comments

Assignees

@sadasu sadasu

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@asalkeld @openshift-merge-robot @sadasu @openshift-bot