OCPBUGS-17249: UPSTREAM: <carry>: openshift-kube-apiserver: pod .spec.nodeName should not override project node selector in podNodeEnvironment admission plugin #1787
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
backports/unvalidated-commits
|
@atiratree: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249, which is invalid:
Comment The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this: 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. |
|
@atiratree: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated. The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:
Comment |
|
/jira refresh |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-bug
|
@atiratree: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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
removed
the
jira/invalid-bug
|
/retest |
atiratree
force-pushed
the
nodeenvadmission
branch
from
8d169ac
to
ca9992a
Compare
|
@atiratree: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated. The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:
Comment |
|
/retest |
| @@ -62,6 +62,11 @@ func (p *podNodeEnvironment) admit(ctx context.Context, a admission.Attributes, | |||
| return nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // NodeName has a precedence | |||
| if len(pod.Spec.NodeName) > 0 { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@atiratree are you sure we want to allow setting nodename explicitly on a pod? Isn't the goal of project node selectors to ensure we can restrict authors to running only on those explicitly pointed out nodes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes you are right, scheduling should not take a precedence over project node selector restrictions.
I have updated the PR, to increase the validations.
atiratree
force-pushed
the
nodeenvadmission
branch
from
ca9992a
to
bc094d2
Compare
|
@atiratree: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated. The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:
Comment |
atiratree
changed the title
|
/retest |
|
/payload 4.15 nightly blocking |
|
@atiratree: trigger 8 job(s) of type blocking for the nightly release of OCP 4.15
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/1dcc4be0-83a3-11ee-92a2-c5beb0277720-0 |
|
/label qe-approved |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
qe-approved
|
@atiratree: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. In response to this: 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. |
|
will add cherry-pick-approved label once other labels are present. |
|
/payload 4.15 nightly blocking |
|
@atiratree: trigger 8 job(s) of type blocking for the nightly release of OCP 4.15
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/be7da460-88b4-11ee-847a-6a2d0b63527e-0 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
/jira refresh The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity. |
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@atiratree: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
|
/jira refresh The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity. |
|
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
|
/retest |
5 similar comments
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/hold cancel |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
/retest-required |
2 similar comments
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest-required |
|
@atiratree: all tests passed! 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. |
|
@atiratree: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-17249 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this: 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER] This PR has been included in build openshift-enterprise-pod-container-v4.16.0-202401111849.p0.g1e00cd0.assembly.stream for distgit openshift-enterprise-pod. |
|
Fix included in accepted release 4.16.0-0.nightly-2024-01-14-231715 |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.15 |
|
@atiratree: new pull request created: #1897 In response to this:
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. |
No description provided.