cGroup v1 is deprecated in 4.16

[mburke5678]

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSDOCS-10339

Add deprecation snippet to various docs.

Enabling Linux control group version 1 (cgroup v1) -- Important note after first paragraph.
Preparing to install a cluster that uses SR-IOV -- Important note after second paragraph.
Tuning nodes for low latency with the performance profile -- Not sure this module is being used.
Enabling Linux control group version 1 (cgroup v1) -- Important note after second bullet
Configuring the Linux cgroup version on your nodes -- Important note after first paragraph
Nodes -> Working with nodes -> Managing nodes -> Adding kernel arguments to nodes -- Important note after second bullet
OCP: Adding kernel arguments to nodes -- Important note after second bullet
OKD: Adding kernel arguments to nodes -- Important note after second bullet
Telco: Reference design specifications -> Telco reference design specifications -> RAN DU reference design configuration CRs -- Important Note after table.
Telco -> RAN DU ref design components -> Node Tuning Operator -- Important note after Engineering consideratiuons list
OCP: Configuring Linux cgroup -- Important note after third paragraph
OKD: Configuring Linux cgroup -- Important note after third paragraph

QE review:

• QE has approved this change.

[ocpdocs-previewbot]

🤖 Mon May 20 20:13:43 - Prow CI generated the docs preview:

https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/installing/install_config/enabling-cgroup-v1.html
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/installing/installing_openstack/installing-openstack-nfv-preparing.html
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/nodes/clusters/nodes-cluster-cgroups-2.html
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/nodes/nodes/nodes-nodes-managing.html
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/post_installation_configuration/cluster-tasks.html
https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/post_installation_configuration/machine-configuration-tasks.html

[mburke5678]

Kevin Quinn (CNF)

[mburke5678]

@gauravsingh85 @control-d PTAL

[gauravsingh85]

LGTM

[mburke5678]

@gauravsingh85 Thank you for the quick review. Do you have any thoughts on who would be an appropriate QE resource to review?

[control-d]

LGTM

[gauravsingh85]

LGTM

[sunilcio]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci]

@mburke5678: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[mletalie]

/label peer-review-in-progress

[mletalie]

Hello @mburke5678,
This may be a result of our mod docs structure, but within this topic do we need to have this note duplicated here: https://75120--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/installing/install_config/enabling-cgroup-v1.html

[mletalie]

A couple of observations/comments:

• I see the preview link Tuning nodes for low latency with the performance profile is directed to the module within the PR and not a doc preview, which makes sense given your comment about that link. Just wanted to mention as this may be a YTBD decision.

• Looking at the rest of the doc previews, I see other examples like the one I mentioned above (the "Important" call-out in close proximity to one another), and understand the need to do so as a result of how we structure docs, so while it may have been worth mentioning, don't think much can be done about it.

• In the note itself, it seems that the words "feature" and functionality" are used interchangeably. Would it be worth it to phrase the call-out so it is consistent throughout? May not matter/make a difference but wanted to mention.

[mletalie]

/label peer-review-done
/remove-label peer-review-in-progress
/remove-label peer-review-needed
/lgtm

[mburke5678]

In the note itself, it seems that the words "feature" and functionality" are used interchangeably. Would it be worth it to phrase the call-out so it is consistent throughout? May not matter/make a difference but wanted to mention.

@mletalie That is a good point. Not sure who is responsible for the boilerplate language, though.

[mburke5678]

I see the preview link Tuning nodes for low latency with the performance profile is directed to the module within the PR and not a doc preview, which makes sense given your comment about that link. Just wanted to mention as this may be a YTBD decision.
Sorry for the confusion, Mark. I added the link to the file with the note that the module might not be in use so that you didn't think I forgot to add the preview.

[mburke5678]

/cherrypick enterprise-4.16

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@mburke5678: new pull request created: #76300

Details

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-4.16

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-sigs/prow repository.