[release-4.9] Bug 2106655: UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu/memory manager containerMap memory leak

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

This is an automated cherry-pick of #1318

/assign rphillips

[openshift-ci-robot]

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: the contents of this pull request could be automatically validated.

The following commits are valid:

• 86eeac7|UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu manager policy set to none, no one remove container id from container map, lead memory leak: the upstream PR kubernetes/kubernetes#109103 has merged

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

[openshift-ci]

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: Bugzilla bug 2106414 has been cloned as Bugzilla bug 2106655. Retitling PR to link against new bug.
/retitle [release-4.9] Bug 2106655: UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu/memory manager containerMap memory leak

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2106414: UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu/memory manager containerMap memory leak

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-cherrypick-robot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2106655, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2106414 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is MODIFIED 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:

[release-4.9] Bug 2106655: UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu/memory manager containerMap memory leak

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.

[rphillips]

/bugzilla refresh
/retest

[openshift-ci]

@rphillips: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2106655, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2106414 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA 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
/retest

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.

[rphillips]

/label backport-risk-assessed

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mrunalp, openshift-cherrypick-robot

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:

• pkg/kubelet/DOWNSTREAM_OWNERS [mrunalp]

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

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mrunalp, openshift-cherrypick-robot

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:

• pkg/kubelet/DOWNSTREAM_OWNERS [mrunalp]

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

[nee1esh]

/retest

[openshift-bot]

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

[openshift-ci]

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2106655, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2106414 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA 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-ci]

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: 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-aws-csi	86eeac7	link	false	/test e2e-aws-csi
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-aws	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-aws
ci/prow/e2e-agnostic-cmd	86eeac7	link	false	/test e2e-agnostic-cmd
ci/prow/images	86eeac7	link	true	/test images
ci/prow/e2e-gcp	86eeac7	link	true	/test e2e-gcp
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial	86eeac7	link	true	/test e2e-aws-serial
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-upgrade	86eeac7	link	true	/test e2e-gcp-upgrade
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-gcp-serial	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-gcp-serial
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-gcp-five-control-plane-replicas	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-gcp-five-control-plane-replicas
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-gcp	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-gcp
ci/prow/e2e-aws-fips	86eeac7	link	true	/test e2e-aws-fips
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-aws-serial	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-aws-serial
ci/prow/k8s-e2e-conformance-aws	86eeac7	link	true	/test k8s-e2e-conformance-aws

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]

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

[openshift-ci]

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2106655, which is invalid:

• expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2106414 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA 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.

[rphillips]

Appears to be a ci issue

/hold

[rphillips]

@openshift-cherrypick-robot /help

[rphillips]

/close

rebased at #1325

[openshift-ci]

@rphillips: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

/close

rebased at #1325

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-cherrypick-robot: An error was encountered removing this pull request from the external tracker bugs for bug 2106655 on the Bugzilla server at https://bugzilla.redhat.com. No known errors were detected, please see the full error message for details.

Full error message.

response code 400 not 200

Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2106655: UPSTREAM: 109103: cpu/memory manager containerMap memory leak

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.