Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults #732

alexander-demicev · 2020-10-21T12:09:23Z

If the user forgets to specify CPU, memory, or disk size we default it to 0 and the reconciler then defaults it to a minimal value.
This PR:

Make webhook return warning on missing VM specs
Removes defaulting from the controller and let's fail to pass.

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-10-21T12:09:32Z

@alexander-demichev: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882723, 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 (4.7.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.7.0)
bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1882723: vSphere: make webhook return error on invalid VM specs

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.

JoelSpeed · 2020-10-21T13:19:19Z

pkg/apis/machine/v1beta1/machine_webhook.go

+	if providerSpec.NumCPUs == 0 {
+		errs = append(errs, field.Invalid(field.NewPath("providerSpec", "numCPUs"), providerSpec.NumCPUs, "numCPUs must be greater than 0"))
+	}


IIRC there's something in the controller that caters for this scenario, can we check that before we add this one?

We want to verify that placing a 0 value in this field will result in a failed machine, have you tried this for each of the three errors you're adding?

JoelSpeed · 2020-10-21T13:19:52Z

pkg/apis/machine/v1beta1/machine_webhook.go

@@ -980,14 +980,24 @@ func validateVSphere(m *Machine, clusterID string) (bool, []string, utilerrors.A

 	errs = append(errs, validateVSphereNetwork(providerSpec.Network, field.NewPath("providerSpec", "network"))...)

-	if providerSpec.NumCPUs < minVSphereCPU {
-		warnings = append(warnings, fmt.Sprintf("providerSpec.numCPUs: %d is less than the minimum value (%d): the minimum value will be used instead", providerSpec.NumCPUs, minVSphereCPU))


Why are we removing the minimum value will be used instead?

I completely forgot about this behavior.

pkg/apis/machine/v1beta1/machine_webhook.go

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-10-23T14:48:18Z

@alexander-demichev: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1882723, which is valid.

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:

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults

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.

JoelSpeed

Have you tried this out on a real cluster, what happens if you set CPU 0?

JoelSpeed · 2020-10-23T15:22:02Z

pkg/apis/machine/v1beta1/machine_webhook.go

@@ -980,14 +980,14 @@ func validateVSphere(m *Machine, clusterID string) (bool, []string, utilerrors.A

 	errs = append(errs, validateVSphereNetwork(providerSpec.Network, field.NewPath("providerSpec", "network"))...)

-	if providerSpec.NumCPUs < minVSphereCPU {
-		warnings = append(warnings, fmt.Sprintf("providerSpec.numCPUs: %d is less than the minimum value (%d): the minimum value will be used instead", providerSpec.NumCPUs, minVSphereCPU))
+	if providerSpec.NumCPUs < minVSphereCPU || providerSpec.NumCPUs == 0 {


Don't think we actually need the or statement here, 0 < minVSphereCPU is true anyway. Similar goes for the cases below

JoelSpeed · 2020-11-30T15:32:12Z

/approve

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-11-30T15:32:31Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: JoelSpeed

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~~ [JoelSpeed]

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

JoelSpeed · 2020-12-01T10:47:24Z

/retest

michaelgugino · 2020-12-04T15:08:36Z

pkg/apis/machine/v1beta1/machine_webhook.go

@@ -981,13 +981,13 @@ func validateVSphere(m *Machine, clusterID string) (bool, []string, utilerrors.A
 	errs = append(errs, validateVSphereNetwork(providerSpec.Network, field.NewPath("providerSpec", "network"))...)

 	if providerSpec.NumCPUs < minVSphereCPU {
-		warnings = append(warnings, fmt.Sprintf("providerSpec.numCPUs: %d is less than the minimum value (%d): the minimum value will be used instead", providerSpec.NumCPUs, minVSphereCPU))
+		warnings = append(warnings, fmt.Sprintf("providerSpec.numCPUs: %d is missing or less than the minimum value (%d): the minimum value will be used instead", providerSpec.NumCPUs, minVSphereCPU))


Are we actually setting the minimum value? Below it looks like that logic was removed from the reconciler.

The logic was removed from the webhook, but is being done in the reconcile loop currently

machine-api-operator/pkg/controller/vsphere/reconciler.go

Lines 550 to 561 in 44f29cc

numCPUs := s.providerSpec.NumCPUs

if numCPUs < minCPU {

numCPUs = minCPU

}

numCoresPerSocket := s.providerSpec.NumCoresPerSocket

if numCoresPerSocket == 0 {

numCoresPerSocket = numCPUs

}

memMiB := s.providerSpec.MemoryMiB

if memMiB == 0 {

memMiB = minMemMB

}

elmiko

/lgtm

elmiko · 2020-12-04T16:05:39Z

Mike's comment came in while i was reviewing, removing my lgtm to ensure we don't merge before it's answered.
/lgtm cancel

alexander-demicev · 2020-12-08T19:24:25Z

@elmiko @michaelgugino Can I get another review?

elmiko

/lgtm

openshift-bot · 2020-12-08T19:40:45Z

/retest

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

openshift-bot · 2020-12-08T21:37:45Z

/retest

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

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-12-08T23:38:06Z

@alexander-demichev: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

openshift/machine-api-operator#732

Bugzilla bug 1882723 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults

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.

Fix and bump to 1.19 kubebuilder-tools script

af9ee56

openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/severity-low Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is low for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 21, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 21, 2020

openshift-ci-robot requested review from Danil-Grigorev and michaelgugino October 21, 2020 12:09

JoelSpeed reviewed Oct 21, 2020

View reviewed changes

vSphere: make webhook return warning on missing VM specs

9b52818

alexander-demicev force-pushed the fixwebhook branch 2 times, most recently from 5209c5c to c975e1b Compare October 23, 2020 14:42

alexander-demicev changed the title ~~Bug 1882723: vSphere: make webhook return error on invalid VM specs~~ Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults Oct 23, 2020

JoelSpeed reviewed Oct 23, 2020

View reviewed changes

alexander-demicev force-pushed the fixwebhook branch from c975e1b to d5f1c9d Compare November 30, 2020 15:05

openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 30, 2020

michaelgugino suggested changes Dec 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

elmiko approved these changes Dec 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci-robot assigned elmiko Dec 4, 2020

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

openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 4, 2020

vSphere: remove CPU and memory defaulting

8a8cf6e

alexander-demicev force-pushed the fixwebhook branch from d5f1c9d to 8a8cf6e Compare December 7, 2020 16:36

elmiko approved these changes Dec 8, 2020

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 8, 2020

openshift-merge-robot merged commit 063975e into openshift:master Dec 8, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults #732

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults #732

alexander-demicev commented Oct 21, 2020 •

edited

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 21, 2020

JoelSpeed Oct 21, 2020

JoelSpeed Oct 21, 2020

alexander-demicev Oct 23, 2020

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 23, 2020

JoelSpeed left a comment

JoelSpeed Oct 23, 2020

JoelSpeed commented Nov 30, 2020

openshift-ci-robot commented Nov 30, 2020

JoelSpeed commented Dec 1, 2020

michaelgugino Dec 4, 2020

JoelSpeed Dec 8, 2020

elmiko left a comment

elmiko commented Dec 4, 2020

alexander-demicev commented Dec 8, 2020

elmiko left a comment

openshift-bot commented Dec 8, 2020

openshift-bot commented Dec 8, 2020

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 8, 2020

	numCPUs := s.providerSpec.NumCPUs
	if numCPUs < minCPU {
	numCPUs = minCPU
	}
	numCoresPerSocket := s.providerSpec.NumCoresPerSocket
	if numCoresPerSocket == 0 {
	numCoresPerSocket = numCPUs
	}
	memMiB := s.providerSpec.MemoryMiB
	if memMiB == 0 {
	memMiB = minMemMB
	}

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults #732

Bug 1882723: vSphere: Create warning on invalid specs and remove defaults #732

Conversation

alexander-demicev commented Oct 21, 2020 • edited

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 21, 2020

JoelSpeed Oct 21, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JoelSpeed Oct 21, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alexander-demicev Oct 23, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 23, 2020

JoelSpeed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JoelSpeed Oct 23, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JoelSpeed commented Nov 30, 2020

openshift-ci-robot commented Nov 30, 2020

JoelSpeed commented Dec 1, 2020

michaelgugino Dec 4, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JoelSpeed Dec 8, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

elmiko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

elmiko commented Dec 4, 2020

alexander-demicev commented Dec 8, 2020

elmiko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-bot commented Dec 8, 2020

openshift-bot commented Dec 8, 2020

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 8, 2020

alexander-demicev commented Oct 21, 2020 •

edited