Skip to content

Conversation

damdo
Copy link
Member

@damdo damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

#5498 missed propagating the MaxActiveUpdateDeleteWait to the managednodegroup scope, resulting in a zero value which made the wait fail, which in turn always failed the E2E.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #5514

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Jun 17, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from faiq and nrb June 17, 2025 10:12
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-priority size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jun 17, 2025
@damdo
Copy link
Member Author

damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-aws-e2e-eks

@damdo
Copy link
Member Author

damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

/release-note-none

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Jun 17, 2025
@damdo
Copy link
Member Author

damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-aws-e2e-eks

@richardcase
Copy link
Member

Feel free to unhold when the e2e pass:

/hold

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 17, 2025
@richardcase
Copy link
Member

Thanks for this @damdo

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 17, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: f51d046118b27872a8e1f1e15fd5dde97ba48baa

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: richardcase

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 17, 2025
@damdo
Copy link
Member Author

damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

Tests passed 🎉

/unhold

@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 17, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit a65a2f6 into kubernetes-sigs:main Jun 17, 2025
25 checks passed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v2.8 milestone Jun 17, 2025
@damdo damdo mentioned this pull request Jun 17, 2025
5 tasks
@dlipovetsky
Copy link
Contributor

/cherrypick release-2.8

@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot

@dlipovetsky: #5554 failed to apply on top of branch "release-2.8":

Applying: fix: missing maxActiveUpdateDeleteWait in managednodegroup scope
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	pkg/cloud/scope/managednodegroup.go
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging pkg/cloud/scope/managednodegroup.go
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in pkg/cloud/scope/managednodegroup.go
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
hint: When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
hint: If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
hint: To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
hint: Disable this message with "git config advice.mergeConflict false"
Patch failed at 0001 fix: missing maxActiveUpdateDeleteWait in managednodegroup scope

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-2.8

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.

@damdo
Copy link
Member Author

damdo commented Jun 17, 2025

@dlipovetsky IIUC #5498 which introduced this is only in main and not in any v2.8.z or in release-2.8
So do we need to backport this?

@dlipovetsky
Copy link
Contributor

@dlipovetsky IIUC #5498 which introduced this is only in main and not in any v2.8.z or in release-2.8 So do we need to backport this?

I'm sorry--not what I wanted to do. I wanted to backport #5517 to release-2.8

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

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. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

capa-eks-e2e: "EKS cluster tests should create a cluster and add nodes" consistently failing

5 participants