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

Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: <carry>: Set informer for openstack #662

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 25, 2021
Merged

Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: <carry>: Set informer for openstack #662

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 25, 2021

Conversation

mandre
Copy link
Member

@mandre mandre commented Apr 13, 2021

Set informer for the openstack cloud provider to ensure it is properly
initialized when reading config from a secret.

Upstream kubernetes#89885 was closed in favor of kubernetes#96750.

Co-authored-by: Hemant Kumar hekumar@redhat.com

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added backports/unvalidated-commits Indicates that not all commits come to merged upstream PRs. bugzilla/severity-urgent Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is urgent 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 Apr 13, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@mandre: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1948953, 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 (4.8.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.8.0)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (juriarte@redhat.com), skipping review request.

In response to this:

Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: 96750: SQUASH: Set informer for openstack

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
Copy link

@mandre: 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:

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 13, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

3 similar comments
@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 13, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 14, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 14, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member

/test ci/prow/images

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@EmilienM: The specified target(s) for /test were not found.
The following commands are available to trigger jobs:

  • /test artifacts
  • /test configmap-scale
  • /test e2e-agnostic-cmd
  • /test e2e-aws
  • /test e2e-aws-csi
  • /test e2e-aws-disruptive
  • /test e2e-aws-downgrade
  • /test e2e-aws-fips
  • /test e2e-aws-jenkins
  • /test e2e-aws-multitenant
  • /test e2e-aws-ovn
  • /test e2e-aws-serial
  • /test e2e-aws-upgrade
  • /test e2e-azure
  • /test e2e-azure-upgrade
  • /test e2e-gcp
  • /test e2e-gcp-upgrade
  • /test e2e-metal-ipi
  • /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-dualstack
  • /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6
  • /test e2e-openstack
  • /test e2e-vsphere
  • /test images
  • /test integration
  • /test k8s-e2e-conformance-aws
  • /test k8s-e2e-gcp
  • /test k8s-e2e-gcp-serial
  • /test unit
  • /test verify
  • /test verify-commits

Use /test all to run the following jobs:

  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-agnostic-cmd
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-aws-csi
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-aws-fips
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-aws-serial
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-gcp
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-e2e-gcp-upgrade
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-images
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-integration
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-k8s-e2e-gcp
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-k8s-e2e-gcp-serial
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-unit
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-verify
  • pull-ci-openshift-kubernetes-master-verify-commits

In response to this:

/test ci/prow/images

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.

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 14, 2021

/test images

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 14, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

1 similar comment
@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 15, 2021

/test e2e-openstack

@mandre
Copy link
Member Author

mandre commented Apr 16, 2021

I'm fairly confident this fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948953. Sadly we do not yet have the parallel test suite running in e2e-openstack to confirm this. I'm changing this with openshift/release#17795.

Running the [sig-storage] In-tree Volumes [Driver: cinder] [Testpattern: Pre-provisioned PV (default fs)] volumes should allow exec of files on the volume [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] [Suite:k8s] test locally with this code, I don't see the failure anymore:

STEP: Creating a PVC followed by a PV
Apr 15 15:38:52.328: INFO: Waiting for PV cinder-btf6t to bind to PVC pvc-7x2qp
Apr 15 15:38:52.328: INFO: Waiting up to 3m0s for PersistentVolumeClaims [pvc-7x2qp] to have phase Bound
Apr 15 15:38:52.420: INFO: PersistentVolumeClaim pvc-7x2qp found but phase is Pending instead of Bound.
Apr 15 15:38:54.510: INFO: PersistentVolumeClaim pvc-7x2qp found and phase=Bound (2.181655411s)
Apr 15 15:38:54.510: INFO: Waiting up to 3m0s for PersistentVolume cinder-btf6t to have phase Bound
Apr 15 15:38:54.602: INFO: PersistentVolume cinder-btf6t found and phase=Bound (92.646545ms)
STEP: Creating pod exec-volume-test-preprovisionedpv-6wn5
STEP: Creating a pod to test exec-volume-test
Apr 15 15:38:54.889: INFO: Waiting up to 5m0s for pod "exec-volume-test-preprovisionedpv-6wn5" in namespace "e2e-volume-960" to be "Succeeded or Failed"

While it was previously failing with:

STEP: Creating a PVC followed by a PV
[AfterEach] [Testpattern: Pre-provisioned PV (default fs)] volumes
  k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.20.0/test/e2e/framework/framework.go:175
STEP: Collecting events from namespace "e2e-volume-4438".
STEP: Found 2 events.
Apr 16 02:57:49.530: INFO: At 2021-04-16 02:57:46 +0000 UTC - event for e2e-volume-4438: {namespace-security-allocation-controller } CreatedSCCRanges: created SCC ranges
Apr 16 02:57:49.530: INFO: At 2021-04-16 02:57:49 +0000 UTC - event for pvc-b644t: {persistentvolume-controller } ProvisioningFailed: storageclass.storage.k8s.io "e2e-volume-4438" not found
Apr 16 02:57:49.561: INFO: POD  NODE  PHASE  GRACE  CONDITIONS
Apr 16 02:57:49.561: INFO: 
Apr 16 02:57:49.646: INFO: skipping dumping cluster info - cluster too large
STEP: Destroying namespace "e2e-volume-4438" for this suite.
fail [k8s.io/kubernetes@v1.20.0/test/e2e/storage/testsuites/base.go:421]: PVC, PV creation failed
Unexpected error:
    <*errors.errorString | 0xc001536440>: {
        s: "PV Create API error: persistentvolumes \"cinder-\" is forbidden: error querying Cinder volume cce1b69c-3e1b-47ab-bba4-ffd1a29b625a: unable to initialize cinder client for region: RegionOne, err: cloud provider is not initialized: secret lister is not initialized",
    }
    PV Create API error: persistentvolumes "cinder-" is forbidden: error querying Cinder volume cce1b69c-3e1b-47ab-bba4-ffd1a29b625a: unable to initialize cinder client for region: RegionOne, err: cloud provider is not initialized: secret lister is not initialized
occurred

@mandre mandre mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2021
Closed
@gnufied
Copy link
Member

gnufied commented Apr 16, 2021

I have also manually verified that this patch fixes the problem.Until we can merge - kubernetes#96750 we can carry this (kinda have to)

@gnufied
Copy link
Member

gnufied commented Apr 16, 2021

lgtm

@jsafrane
Copy link

@mandre can you please fix the commit message? It must start with UPSTREAM: <nr>: xxx

@mandre @gnufied
UPSTREAM: <carry>: Set informer for openstack
ce275f3 
Set informer for the openstack cloud provider to ensure it is properly
initialized when reading config from a secret.

Upstream 89885 was closed in favor of 96750.

Co-authored-by: Hemant Kumar <hekumar@redhat.com>
@mandre mandre changed the title Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: 96750: SQUASH: Set informer for openstack Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: <carry>: Set informer for openstack Apr 16, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@mandre: 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:

@jsafrane
Copy link

/lgtm
It is what we want to fix the referenced bug. It fixes a carry patch we already have. I let the approvers judge if it's acceptable.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 16, 2021
@EmilienM
Copy link
Member

lgtm, Martin is on PTO, please ping me directly if any change is needed. We need this patch asap.
Thanks

@jsafrane
Copy link

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

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

9 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.

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial ci/prow/e2e-gcp-upgrade

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@EmilienM: EmilienM unauthorized: /override is restricted to Repo administrators, approvers in top level OWNERS file.

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial ci/prow/e2e-gcp-upgrade

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.

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member

@soltysh could you please override the failing jobs which have nothing to do with that patch, thanks a lot

@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.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 21edc36 into openshift:master Apr 25, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

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

Bugzilla bug 1948953 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1948953: UPSTREAM: : Set informer for openstack

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.

@mandre mandre mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mfojtik mfojtik Awaiting requested review from mfojtik

@soltysh soltysh Awaiting requested review from soltysh

Assignees

@mfojtik mfojtik

@smarterclayton smarterclayton

@jsafrane jsafrane

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-urgent Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is urgent 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. 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.
10 participants
@mandre @openshift-ci-robot @EmilienM @gnufied @jsafrane @mfojtik @soltysh @openshift-bot @smarterclayton @openshift-merge-robot