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

Bug 2041989: no CredentialsRequests in ibm-cloud-managed #1280

Merged

Conversation

joelddiaz
Copy link
Contributor

The ibm-cloud-managed profile doesn't use the cloud-credential-operator.
The CredentialsRequest CRs should not be installed in that environment.

Unmark the existing CredentialsRequests so they are no longer installed
in ibm-cloud-managed.

Create a list of previously-installed CredentialsRequests so that they
are cleaned up by the CVO only on the ibm-cloud-managed profile.

xref: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CCO-177

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented Jan 18, 2022

@joelddiaz do we need to add the deletions? This was never shipped.

@joelddiaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@squeed If this PR will make it in before 4.10, then the deletions aren't needed. I can update it to just remove the annotations if we think this PR has a chance for 4.10.

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented Jan 18, 2022

@joelddiaz definietly, this will make it in in the next few days.

The ibm-cloud-managed profile doesn't use the cloud-credential-operator.
The CredentialsRequest CRs should not be installed in that environment.

Unmark the existing CredentialsRequests so they are no longer installed
in ibm-cloud-managed.
@joelddiaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@squeed ok, i've remove the list of resources marked for deletion

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented Jan 18, 2022

/approve
/lgtm

This is a trivial change, I'll override any nasty CI runs.

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented Jan 18, 2022

@joelddiaz this will need a bz to merge.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 18, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 18, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: joelddiaz, squeed

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 Jan 18, 2022
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@joelddiaz joelddiaz changed the title no CredentialsRequests in ibm-cloud-managed Bug 2041989: no CredentialsRequests in ibm-cloud-managed Jan 18, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/severity-unspecified Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is unspecified for the PR. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 18, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 18, 2022

@joelddiaz: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2041989, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" release, but it targets "---" 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:

Bug 2041989: no CredentialsRequests in ibm-cloud-managed

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.

@joelddiaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 18, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 18, 2022

@joelddiaz: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2041989, 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 (4.10.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.0)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @zhaozhanqi

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-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

4 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

20 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 20, 2022

@joelddiaz: 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
ci/prow/e2e-azure-ovn ced5d09 link false /test e2e-azure-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6-ipsec ced5d09 link false /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6-ipsec
ci/prow/e2e-ovn-ipsec-step-registry ced5d09 link false /test e2e-ovn-ipsec-step-registry
ci/prow/e2e-ovn-step-registry ced5d09 link false /test e2e-ovn-step-registry
ci/prow/e2e-vsphere-ovn ced5d09 link false /test e2e-vsphere-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade ced5d09 link false /test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade

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.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

3 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit f20a582 into openshift:master Jan 21, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 21, 2022

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

Bugzilla bug 2041989 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 2041989: no CredentialsRequests in ibm-cloud-managed

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.

wking added a commit to wking/openshift-release that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2022
…redentials-request

Since fc.2, [1,2] landed dropping some:

  include.release.openshift.io/ibm-cloud-managed: "true"

annotations.  ibm-cloud-managed clusters do not run an in-cluster
cloud-credential operator, so they are all manual-mode credential
management.  And ccoctl, the manual management tool, is currently
oblivious to cluster profiles [3].  So there's no functional impact on
anyone to this change, and we'd like to bump the pinned version to
explicitly allow it, while still detecting any future cred changes in
4.10.

Unfortunately, ci-operator does not seem to have a releases entry type
that would allow us to say:

  oldest-supported-credentials-request:
    image: registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release:4.10.0-0.ci-2022-01-26-071949

or anything similar.  The supported release types are [4]:

* integration, which seems to be down in the ImageStream level.
* candidate, which gets us to the nightly stream, but which only
  accepts a 'rel' offset, not an explicit release name.
* prerelease, which is looking at 4-stable [5], which does not include
  nightlies.
* release [6], which fetches from the official OpenShift Update
  Service [7], which does not include nightlies.

So instead of pinning a nightly, I'm just floating the "frozen"
version one nightly behind the version being considered.  Once we get
an fc.3 we can pin this back down again.

[1]: openshift/cluster-network-operator#1280
[2]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2041989
[3]: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CCO-178
[4]: https://github.com/openshift/ci-tools/blob/87153c5ab0013fe34b7dcf5570920cca9f9454c8/pkg/api/types.go#L218-L278
[5]: https://github.com/openshift/ci-tools/blob/87153c5ab0013fe34b7dcf5570920cca9f9454c8/pkg/release/prerelease/client.go#L19
[6]: https://github.com/openshift/ci-tools/blob/87153c5ab0013fe34b7dcf5570920cca9f9454c8/pkg/api/types.go#L328-L337
[7]: https://github.com/openshift/ci-tools/blob/87153c5ab0013fe34b7dcf5570920cca9f9454c8/pkg/release/official/client.go#L19
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. bugzilla/severity-unspecified Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is unspecified for the PR. 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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants