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

[release-1.2] Introduce new flag - strict-topology #288

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2019
Merged

[release-1.2] Introduce new flag - strict-topology #288

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 14, 2019

Conversation

avalluri
Copy link
Contributor

@avalluri avalluri commented Jun 6, 2019

Backport #282 to release-1.2

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind design

What this PR does / why we need it:
Allows the driver to support delayed binding properly.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #221

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

support strict topology for volumes with delayed binding

@avalluri
Introduce new flag - strict-topology
45805aa 
With the current implementation, In delayed binding case, CSI driver is offered
with all nodes topology that are matched with 'selected node' topology keys in
CreateVolumeRequest.AccessibilityRequirements. So this allows the driver to
select any node from the passed preferred list to create volume. But this
results in scheduling failure when the volume created on a node other than
Kubernetes selected node.

To address this, introduced new flag "--strict-topology', when set, in case of
delayed binding, the driver is offered with only selected node topology, so that
driver has to create the volume on this node.

Modified tests so that now every test is run with and without 'strict topology'.
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Jun 6, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @avalluri. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-csi or kubernetes 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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jun 6, 2019
@avalluri avalluri mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2019
Closed
@pohly
Copy link
Contributor

pohly commented Jun 6, 2019

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-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 Jun 6, 2019
@msau42
Copy link
Collaborator

msau42 commented Jun 6, 2019

/lgtm
/approve
/hold

As a sanity check, given that hostpath doesn't implement topology, I want to first run the pd e2es on a multi-zone cluster to make sure this hasn't caused any regressions

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Jun 6, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: avalluri, msau42

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 6, 2019
@msau42
Copy link
Collaborator

msau42 commented Jun 14, 2019

Tested manually with repd

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 14, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit ecb1191 into kubernetes-csi:release-1.2 Jun 14, 2019
kbsonlong pushed a commit to kbsonlong/external-provisioner that referenced this pull request Dec 29, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Merge pull request kubernetes-csi#288 from pohly/prow-update-master
3d52fbd 
master: update release-tools
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@davidz627 davidz627 Awaiting requested review from davidz627

@sbezverk sbezverk Awaiting requested review from sbezverk

Assignees

@msau42 msau42

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. kind/design Categorizes issue or PR as related to design. lgtm "Looks good to me", 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. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. 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.
4 participants
@avalluri @k8s-ci-robot @pohly @msau42