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.

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

Bug 1880787: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO #767

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 3, 2020

Conversation

sadasu
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasu sadasu commented Nov 30, 2020

cluster-baremetal-operator will take care of managing these
resources.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 1, 2020

/test e2e-aws

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 1, 2020

/test e2e-metal-ipi

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 1, 2020

/retest

@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 1, 2020

What do you think about removing the RelatedObjects from status.go and status_test.go?

Group: "metal3.io",
Resource: "baremetalhosts",
Name: "",
Namespace: optr.namespace,
},

{
Group: "metal3.io",
Resource: "baremetalhosts",
Name: "",
Namespace: namespace,
},

@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 1, 2020

/retitle Bug 1903275: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot changed the title Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO Bug 1903275: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO Dec 1, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasu: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1903275, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.7.0" release, but it targets "---" 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:

Bug 1903275: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO

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 bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Dec 1, 2020
@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 1, 2020

Let's use this PR as the fix for the CRD conflict between CBO and MAO.

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added 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. and removed bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Dec 1, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@stbenjam: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1903275, 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:

Let's use this PR as the fix for the CRD conflict between CBO and MAO.

/bugzilla refresh

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 the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 1, 2020
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 1, 2020

#767 (comment)

@stbenjam I am not sure if we need that because capbm refers to the baremetalhost CR. I could try to make that change and test.

cluster-baremetal-operator will take care of managing these
resources.
Copy link
Contributor

@michaelgugino michaelgugino left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 1, 2020
@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 1, 2020

#767 (comment)

@stbenjam I am not sure if we need that because capbm refers to the baremetalhost CR. I could try to make that change and test.

Oh I see, that makes sense, it probably should stay as a related object then.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 1, 2020

/test e2e-aws

@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 1, 2020

/lgtm

@michaelgugino Would you be able to approve or do we need to get someone else? Thanks!

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 2, 2020

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the bugzilla/severity-urgent Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is urgent for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 2, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasu: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880787, 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 ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1880787: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO

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/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 2, 2020
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[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:

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 Dec 2, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Dec 2, 2020

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Dec 2, 2020

Previous e2e-aws-operator job:

2020/12/02 14:06:29 Container test in pod e2e-aws-operator-test completed successfully

before getting hung up in a slow gather-extra step. If this is blocking promotions, maybe we should /override ci/prow/e2e-aws-operator instead of waiting for a retest to go through? Maybe only if this current job fails?

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Dec 2, 2020

/bugzilla refresh

to pick up the urgent tag.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-urgent Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is urgent for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Dec 2, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@wking: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1880787, 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:

/bugzilla refresh

to pick up the urgent tag.

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-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Dec 2, 2020

e2e-aws-operator failed install with VPC: VpcLimitExceeded, which is a CI-infra issue, orthogonal to this PR.

@stbenjam
Copy link
Member

stbenjam commented Dec 2, 2020

Overriding it sounds fine to us, we'll need an approver in MAO to actually do it: Maybe @JoelSpeed or @michaelgugino?

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

3 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Dec 2, 2020

Most recent e2e-aws-operator failure is:

Autoscaler should use a ClusterAutoscaler that has 12 maximum total nodes count and balance similar nodes enabled scales up and down while respecting MaxNodesTotal 

But both install and gather-extra worked fine this time 😆

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 6e6c0cf into openshift:master Dec 3, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

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

Bugzilla bug 1880787 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1880787: Remove changes required to deploy metal3 pods from MAO

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants