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

Revert "UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" #434

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 6, 2020
Merged

Revert "UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" #434

merged 1 commit into from Nov 6, 2020

Conversation

tssurya
Copy link

@tssurya tssurya commented Nov 2, 2020 •
edited

This reverts commit b73d7e5.

The commit was not supposed to go into master but into the specific sdn-branch.
(Did not know that origin builds only tests)

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 2, 2020

/assign @danwinship

@tssurya tssurya changed the title Revert "UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" Revert "Bug 1879607: UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" Nov 2, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. label Nov 2, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@tssurya: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1879607, which is valid. 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 (4.7.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.7.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Revert "Bug 1879607: UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain"

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/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Nov 2, 2020
@tssurya tssurya changed the title Revert "Bug 1879607: UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" Revert "UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain" Nov 2, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@tssurya: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request.
To reference a bug, add 'Bug XXX:' to the title of this pull request and request another bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

Revert "UPSTREAM: 95252: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain"

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 removed 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. labels Nov 2, 2020
@tssurya tssurya mentioned this pull request Nov 2, 2020
Merged
@danwinship
Copy link

I think the commit message has to start "UPSTREAM: 95252:", and then you can put the "revert" afterward? Or maybe use "UPSTREAM: :" instead? Not sure...
/assign @deads2k

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 2, 2020

I think the commit message has to start "UPSTREAM: 95252:", and then you can put the "revert" afterward? Or maybe use "UPSTREAM: :" instead? Not sure...

yea I had to add the [revert] label for theci/prow/verify-commits to pass, but I am not sure if that is the right one since in the description adding revert means picking a revert from upstream, whereas this patch is not exactly reverted from upstream

UPSTREAM commits are validated against the following regular expression:
^UPSTREAM: (revert: )?(([\w.-]+/[\w-.-]+)?: )?(\d+:|:|:)

UPSTREAM commit summaries should look like:

UPSTREAM: <PR number|carry|drop>: description

UPSTREAM commits which revert previous UPSTREAM commits should look like:

UPSTREAM: revert:

Examples of valid summaries:

UPSTREAM: 12345: A kube fix
UPSTREAM: : A carried kube change
UPSTREAM: : A dropped kube change
UPSTREAM: revert: 12345: A kube revert

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 2, 2020

/test k8s-e2e-gcp
/test e2e-aws-csi

@tssurya
UPSTREAM: 95252: revert: Kube-proxy: Perf-fix: Shrink INPUT chain
60768ae 
This reverts commit b73d7e5
because it needs to get in only for sdn. So it need not be in the
master branch.

Signed-off-by: Surya Seetharaman <suryaseetharaman.9@gmail.com>
@deads2k
Copy link

deads2k commented Nov 4, 2020

/lgtm
/approve

thanks for tidying up.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 4, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: deads2k, tssurya

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-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 4, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 4, 2020 

/test e2e-aws-serial

1 similar comment
@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 4, 2020

/test e2e-aws-serial

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

10 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 5, 2020

/test e2e-aws-serial

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

13 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@tssurya
Copy link
Author

tssurya commented Nov 6, 2020

hmm this is strange, why is CI retesting on already passed tests?

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 1fbd799 into openshift:master Nov 6, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@danwinship danwinship Awaiting requested review from danwinship

@dcbw dcbw Awaiting requested review from dcbw

Assignees

@danwinship danwinship

@deads2k deads2k

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. 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
6 participants
@tssurya @openshift-ci-robot @danwinship @deads2k @openshift-bot @openshift-merge-robot