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 1767047: add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller #42

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 21, 2019
Merged

Bug 1767047: add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller #42

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 21, 2019

Conversation

sallyom
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom sallyom commented Oct 24, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: 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:

add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller

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 size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Oct 24, 2019
@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

deads2k commented Oct 24, 2019

@sallyom link the 4.2 rbac PR in the operator

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: 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:

add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller

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.

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Oct 24, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@sallyom link the 4.2 rbac PR in the operator

and needs a hold til these merge:

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Oct 24, 2019
@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Oct 29, 2019

/retest

@sallyom sallyom changed the title add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller Bug 1767047: add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller Oct 30, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1767047, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1745102 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is NEW 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 1767047: add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller

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/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 30, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1767047, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST, but it is MODIFIED instead
  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1745102 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is NEW 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:

/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.

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Oct 31, 2019

/bugzilla refresh

@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 Oct 31, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1767047, which is valid. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

/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 Oct 31, 2019
soltysh
soltysh approved these changes Nov 6, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@soltysh soltysh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 6, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sallyom, soltysh

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 6, 2019
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member

the requisite pr is tagged for merge, do they both need to merge in order to ship?

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 11, 2019

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 11, 2019
@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 11, 2019

/retest

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 11, 2019

the requisite pr is tagged for merge, do they both need to merge in order to ship?

Yes, retesting and unhold - this is required for upgrades 4.2-4.3 so the NewNamespaceSCCAllocationController in openshift-controller-manager (4.2) doesn't interfere w/ NewNamespaceSCCAllocationController in cluster-policy-controller (4.3 -it moved).

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 11, 2019

/test e2e-aws-builds

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 12, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@soltysh i see this failure: StdErr: "Error from server (NotFound): imagestreams.image.openshift.io \"ruby-22-centos7\" not found", you fixed that in master unit tests, right? so it's failing in 4.2 also? 👀

ah, maybe it needs this to merge: openshift/origin#24109

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

6 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.

@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.

@sallyom
Copy link
Contributor Author

sallyom commented Nov 14, 2019

openshift/origin#24109 will fix e2e-aws-builds

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

15 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.

@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.

@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.

@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.

@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.

@mfojtik
Copy link
Contributor

mfojtik commented Nov 21, 2019

/test all

lets give this one more round of green tests.

@mfojtik
Copy link
Contributor

mfojtik commented Nov 21, 2019

Seems all green, approving.

@mfojtik mfojtik added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Nov 21, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 79fb7a5 into openshift:release-4.2 Nov 21, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sallyom: An error was encountered searching for bug 1767047 on the Bugzilla server at https://bugzilla.redhat.com:

Get https://bugzilla.redhat.com/rest/bug/1767047?api_key=CENSORED: read tcp 172.16.74.108:45284->209.132.183.69:443: read: connection reset by peer
Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

Bug 1767047: add leader lock for cluster-policy-controller in scc_namespace_allocator controller

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.

stlaz pushed a commit to stlaz/openshift-controller-manager that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot
Merge pull request openshift#42 from adambkaplan/operatorv1
f0f7889 
Operator v1 Migration
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@soltysh soltysh soltysh approved these changes

Assignees

@soltysh soltysh

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@sallyom @openshift-ci-robot @deads2k @derekwaynecarr @openshift-bot @soltysh @mfojtik @openshift-merge-robot