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 1789920: Fix bad opgroup annotations #1267

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Jan 31, 2020
Merged

Bug 1789920: Fix bad opgroup annotations #1267

merged 4 commits into from Jan 31, 2020

Conversation

ecordell
Copy link
Member

Description of the change:
This has two tests and two fixes:

  1. Fixes an issue where copied CSV's would have their operatorgroup annotation overwritten, causing them not to be GCd
  2. Adds a test to verify that behavior
  3. Finds any CSVs that may have bad operatorgroup annotations from a previous version of OLM with the bug and GC's them
  4. Adds a test to verify that behavior

Motivation for the change:

Copied CSVs had their operatorgroup annotations overwritten if they landed in namespaces that had their own operatorgroups. The GC loop looks at this annotation to find the "parent" real csv, so for ownnamespace operatorgroups, GC would find that same copied CSV, see it present, and not GC it.

This fixes the underlying issue and adds cleanup for any CSVs that have these bad annotations.

Reviewer Checklist

  • Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
  • Sufficient unit test coverage
  • Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
  • Docs updated or added to /docs
  • Commit messages sensible and descriptive

@ecordell
test(ci): add failing test assertion showing that operatorgroup
8159d0d 
annotations on copied csvs will get overwritten to the wrong thing
@ecordell
fix(operatorgroup): don't overwrite operatorgroup annotations on copied
591c002 
csvs. these annotations are used to calculate gc graphs and overwriting
them causes copied csvs to be left behind if they land in a target ns
that has another operatorgroup in it.
@ecordell
test(e2e): add test to reproduce bug where copied csvs with annotations
a902029 
that indicate the current namespace is the operatorgroupnamespace are
not gc'd properly. this is the result of a previous bug where the
namespace annotations could be incorrectly set on copied csvs.

the next commit will fix this test and cause it to pass.
@ecordell
fix(gc): clean up copied csvs that have incorrect operatorgroups
813f844
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 30, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@ecordell: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1789920, 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:

Bug 1789920: Fix bad opgroup annotations

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/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 30, 2020
njhale
njhale approved these changes Jan 30, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@njhale njhale 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 Jan 30, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ecordell, njhale

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

@njhale
Copy link
Member

njhale commented Jan 30, 2020

/retest

1 similar comment
@njhale
Copy link
Member

njhale commented Jan 30, 2020

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

5 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-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit bb3653f into operator-framework:master Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@ecordell: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged. Bugzilla bug 1789920 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1789920: Fix bad opgroup annotations

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.

@ecordell
Copy link
Member Author

/cherry-pick release-4.3

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@ecordell: new pull request created: #1272

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.3

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-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2020
Merged
@anik120 anik120 mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@njhale njhale njhale approved these changes

@jpeeler jpeeler Awaiting requested review from jpeeler

Assignees

@njhale njhale

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. 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
6 participants
@ecordell @openshift-ci-robot @njhale @openshift-bot @openshift-cherrypick-robot @openshift-merge-robot