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 1882394: UPSTREAM: <carry>: operator-sdk: return error if lock is not leader-for-life #96

Merged

Conversation

bertinatto
Copy link
Member

@bertinatto bertinatto commented Oct 9, 2020

In a 4.6 -> 4.5 downgrade scenario, CSO 4.5 could be started before CSO 4.6 is terminated.

This could happen:

  1. CSO 4.6 creates a leader_with_lease ConfigMap
  2. User downgrades to OCP 4.5
  3. CSO 4.5 starts and sees that the existing ConfigMap was created by CSO 4.6, so it deletes it and continues to initialize
  4. CSO 4.6 sees that its leader_with_lease ConfigMap was deleted and quickly re-created it
  5. CSO 4.5 is still starting up. Now it tries to become the leader by creating the leader_for_life ConfigMap, but that fails because another object with the same name exists
  6. CSO 4.5 (i.e., operator-sdk) gets stuck in a loop trying to create the lock, but it fails forever

This patch introduces a check in the legacy operator-sdk code to prevent CSO 4.5 from getting stuck in the loop described in step 6 above.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@bertinatto: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882394, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1877316 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE) 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 1882394: UPSTREAM: : operator-sdk: return error if lock is not leader-for-life

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-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Oct 9, 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 Oct 9, 2020
@jsafrane jsafrane 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 Oct 9, 2020
@jsafrane
Copy link
Contributor

jsafrane commented Oct 9, 2020

There is no 4.6 counterpart, the bug is only in 4.5
/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Oct 9, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@bertinatto: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882394, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1877316 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE) 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 1882394: UPSTREAM: : operator-sdk: return error if lock is not leader-for-life

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-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 9, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882394, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1877316 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE) 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
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882394, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1877316 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE) 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
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882394, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1877316 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE) 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.

@jsafrane
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@jsafrane jsafrane 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 Oct 12, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bertinatto, jsafrane

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 [bertinatto,jsafrane]

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

@mfojtik
Copy link
Member

mfojtik commented Oct 12, 2020

patch manager: please take this for the next z-stream, it came very late in 4.5.z cycle.

@knobunc knobunc added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Oct 14, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit d86f1ce into openshift:release-4.5 Oct 14, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

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

Bugzilla bug 1882394 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1882394: UPSTREAM: : operator-sdk: return error if lock is not leader-for-life

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
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high 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. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. 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

7 participants