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 1779864: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option #24257

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 12, 2019
Merged

Bug 1779864: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option #24257

merged 1 commit into from Dec 12, 2019

Conversation

vladikr
Copy link
Member

@vladikr vladikr commented Dec 4, 2019

Upstream reference: kubernetes/kubernetes#83592

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1775826, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.4.0" release, but it targets "4.3.0" instead
  • expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST, but it is ON_QA 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 1775826: [release-4.3] UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option

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/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Dec 4, 2019
@vladikr vladikr changed the title Bug 1775826: [release-4.3] UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: 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:

UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option

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 needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

Hi @vladikr. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 4, 2019

/cc @rphillips @sjenning @eparis

@vladikr vladikr changed the title UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option Bug 1779857: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1779857, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.4.0" release, but it targets "4.3.0" instead
  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1775826 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is ON_QA 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 1779857: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option

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 Dec 4, 2019
@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 4, 2019

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1779857, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.4.0" release, but it targets "4.3.0" instead
  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1775826 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), but it is ON_QA 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.

@vladikr vladikr changed the title Bug 1779857: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option Bug 1779864: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1779864, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.4.0" 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 1779864: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option

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.

@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 4, 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 Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1779864, 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.

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 Dec 4, 2019
@eparis
Copy link
Member

eparis commented Dec 4, 2019

/ok-to-test

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Dec 4, 2019
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 11, 2019

/retest

1 similar comment
@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 11, 2019

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

14 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.

@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 12, 2019 •
edited

@rphillips @sjenning @eparis I'm not sure what's wrong with these tests. It's been more than 24 hours after the approval and these tests passed before.

@vladikr
Copy link
Member Author

vladikr commented Dec 12, 2019

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

7 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-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 1d36ec3 into openshift:master Dec 12, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vladikr: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged. Bugzilla bug 1779864 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1779864: UPSTREAM: drop 83592: added --reserved-cpus kubelet command option

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
Reviewers

@bparees bparees Awaiting requested review from bparees

@soltysh soltysh Awaiting requested review from soltysh

@eparis eparis Awaiting requested review from eparis

@rphillips rphillips Awaiting requested review from rphillips

@sjenning sjenning Awaiting requested review from sjenning

Assignees

@rphillips rphillips

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. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@vladikr @openshift-ci-robot @eparis @rphillips @sjenning @openshift-bot @openshift-merge-robot