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
image-mirroring: Drop driver-toolkit
from OKD 4.15
#43816
Conversation
/retest-required |
/test build09-dry |
@@ -128,7 +128,6 @@ registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.15:descheduler quay.io/openshift/origin-desch | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.15:docker-builder quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-builder:4.15 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-builder:4.15.0 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-builder:latest | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.15:docker-registry quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-registry:4.15 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-registry:4.15.0 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-registry:latest | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.15:dpu-network-operator quay.io/openshift/origin-dpu-network-operator:4.15 quay.io/openshift/origin-dpu-network-operator:4.15.0 quay.io/openshift/origin-dpu-network-operator:latest | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.15:driver-toolkit quay.io/openshift/origin-driver-toolkit:4.15 quay.io/openshift/origin-driver-toolkit:4.15.0 quay.io/openshift/origin-driver-toolkit:latest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Who is using those images?
DTK's customers are usually getting the image using oc adm release info ... --image-for driver-toolkit
and getting an image from quay.io/openshift-release-dev/...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Before merging this PR, we need to make sure that OKD's users running oc adm release info ... --image-for driver-toolkit
won't get those images. If this is the case then we shouldn't remove them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Customers shouldn't be using any OKD images unless they specifically want to do that. OKD won't have the driver-toolkit going forward, unless OKD-variant specific builds of that image are set up.
@@ -120,7 +120,6 @@ registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.13:descheduler quay.io/openshift/origin-desch | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.13:docker-builder quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-builder:4.13 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-builder:4.13.0 | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.13:docker-registry quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-registry:4.13 quay.io/openshift/origin-docker-registry:4.13.0 | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.13:dpu-network-operator quay.io/openshift/origin-dpu-network-operator:4.13 quay.io/openshift/origin-dpu-network-operator:4.13.0 | |||
registry.ci.openshift.org/origin/4.13:driver-toolkit quay.io/openshift/origin-driver-toolkit:4.13 quay.io/openshift/origin-driver-toolkit:4.13.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know the specific details here on what's the right call, but high-level I'm thinking of this change to drop machine-os-content as affecting 4.15 and onwards only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't see what we would bother to remove those if machine-os-content
is shipped in older versions anyway.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Interested in what other stakeholders think, but IMO it doesn't seem worth the risk. Even if we did decide to do this in older releases, we should validate it in 4.15 first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The driver toolkit image that is in OKD right now is actually an RHCOS one from Prow CI. It shouldn't be there and if nothing's image-referencing it, removing it from all current OKD versions (4.13+) should be safe afaict.
Removing driver-toolkit
from 4.15 is required before switching the image-reference that it contains from machine-os-content
to rhel-coreos
, as the release controllers for OKD (and required CI tests like /test okd-images
) will otherwise fail due to the OKD ImageStreams not containing an image of that name.
To be extra cautious, I can split this and do only 4.15 first. Please let me know.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On a related note, is it too late to switch to a more agnostic image name, like simply coreos
? That would make separate builds for OCP and OKD for some components like the MCO superfluous.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To be extra cautious, I can split this and do only 4.15 first. Please let me know.
Can't we just remove it for 4.15? Is it an issue to keep machine-os-content in older versions?
On a related note, is it too late to switch to a more agnostic image name, like simply coreos? That would make separate builds for OCP and OKD for some components like the MCO superfluous.
You mean instead of rhel-coreos
? I don't mind as long as DTK's image-references is updated accordingly but I won't mix those 2 efforts anyway. Let's keep this PR simple IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure I follow. machine-os-content
will continue to exist in OKD 4.13 and 4.14.
This change is really just about removing an OCP image from OKD (driver-toolkit, which happens to reference machine-os-content today). The change in this PR is now as simple as can be, PTAL.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes rhel-coreos
. We're doing separate OKD / OCP builds for a couple of components, where the only difference is the base OS image-reference they contain (see e.g. https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/blob/master/Dockerfile#L24-L35)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then I am OK with it. Probably better to discuss it with the coreOS folks.
Is it related to this PR though?
[REHEARSALNOTIFIER] Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
driver-toolkit
from OKD 4.15
This looks sane to me. Thanks for working on this! Will let @ybettan do the final stamping. Re. naming, I think a better approach is probably to not care about the name at all and just focus on the |
/lgtm |
/assign @jupierce |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jlebon, jupierce, LorbusChris, ybettan 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 |
@LorbusChris: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
@LorbusChris: Updated the
In response to this: 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. |
No description provided.