MGMT-21810: Support TNF cluster installation using kube-api

[giladravid16]

Allow installing TNF clusters using the kube-api as described in our enhancement.

I deployed a cluster with MCE using my image and tested the following:

1. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the correct credentials were set for the host's fencing_credentials. I tired with and without certificateVerification in the secret.
2. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName to a none existing secret and checking that the correct error was in the agent's status.
3. Setting a label on the BMH for the fencing credentials secret name in order to simulate ZTP and checking that it was set on the agent.
4. Without setting the agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the fencing credentials were set from the BMH and it's secret. I tried with and without disableCertificateVerification on the BMH.
5. Late binding a host with fencing credentials only works if the cluster's openshift version is at least 4.20.

List all the issues related to this PR

Closes MGMT-21810

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

[openshift-ci-robot]

@giladravid16: This pull request references MGMT-21810 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Allow installing TNF clusters using the kube-api as described in our enhancement.

I deployed a cluster with MCE using my image and tested the following:

1. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the correct credentials were set for the host's fencing_credentials. I tired with and without certificateVerification in the secret.
2. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName to a none existing secret and checking that the correct error was in the agent's status.
3. Setting a label on the BMH for the fencing credentials secret name in order to simulate ZTP and checking that it was set on the agent.
4. Without setting the agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the fencing credentials were set from the BMH and it's secret. I tried with and without disableCertificateVerification on the BMH.

List all the issues related to this PR

Closes MGMT-21810

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@giladravid16: This pull request references MGMT-21810 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Allow installing TNF clusters using the kube-api as described in our enhancement.

I deployed a cluster with MCE using my image and tested the following:

1. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the correct credentials were set for the host's fencing_credentials. I tired with and without certificateVerification in the secret.
2. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName to a none existing secret and checking that the correct error was in the agent's status.
3. Setting a label on the BMH for the fencing credentials secret name in order to simulate ZTP and checking that it was set on the agent.
4. Without setting the agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the fencing credentials were set from the BMH and it's secret. I tried with and without disableCertificateVerification on the BMH.

List all the issues related to this PR

Closes MGMT-21810

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 72.72727% with 30 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 43.16%. Comparing base (0798b59) to head (fce84b4).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...nal/controller/controllers/bmh_agent_controller.go	73.33%	11 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...nternal/controller/controllers/agent_controller.go	72.72%	8 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
internal/bminventory/inventory.go	66.66%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #8085      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   42.87%   43.16%   +0.29%     
==========================================
  Files         403      404       +1     
  Lines       69491    69869     +378     
==========================================
+ Hits        29793    30161     +368     
+ Misses      37020    37006      -14     
- Partials     2678     2702      +24     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
internal/bminventory/inventory.go	71.79% <66.66%> (+0.30%)	⬆️
...nternal/controller/controllers/agent_controller.go	76.81% <72.72%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
...nal/controller/controllers/bmh_agent_controller.go	75.75% <73.33%> (-0.20%)	⬇️

... and 13 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@giladravid16: This pull request references MGMT-21810 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

Allow installing TNF clusters using the kube-api as described in our enhancement.

I deployed a cluster with MCE using my image and tested the following:

1. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the correct credentials were set for the host's fencing_credentials. I tired with and without certificateVerification in the secret.
2. Setting an agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName to a none existing secret and checking that the correct error was in the agent's status.
3. Setting a label on the BMH for the fencing credentials secret name in order to simulate ZTP and checking that it was set on the agent.
4. Without setting the agent's spec.fencingCredentialsSecretName and checking that the fencing credentials were set from the BMH and it's secret. I tried with and without disableCertificateVerification on the BMH.
5. Late binding a host with fencing credentials only works if the cluster's openshift version is at least 4.20.

List all the issues related to this PR

Closes MGMT-21810

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: carbonin, giladravid16

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [carbonin,giladravid16]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD f456043 and 2 for PR HEAD fce84b4 in total

[giladravid16]

/retest-required

[gamli75]

/Override ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

[openshift-ci]

@gamli75: /override requires failed status contexts, check run or a prowjob name to operate on.
The following unknown contexts/checkruns were given:

• ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi
• ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

Only the following failed contexts/checkruns were expected:

• ci/prow/e2e-agent-compact-ipv4
• ci/prow/edge-assisted-operator-catalog-publish-verify
• ci/prow/edge-ci-index
• ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi
• ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp
• ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi
• ci/prow/edge-e2e-metal-assisted-4-20
• ci/prow/edge-images
• ci/prow/edge-lint
• ci/prow/edge-subsystem-aws
• ci/prow/edge-subsystem-kubeapi-aws
• ci/prow/edge-unit-test
• ci/prow/edge-verify-generated-code
• ci/prow/images
• ci/prow/mce-images
• ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
• ci/prow/okd-scos-images
• ci/prow/verify-deps
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-assisted-version-placeholder-images
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-e2e-agent-compact-ipv4
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-assisted-operator-catalog-publish-verify
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-ci-index
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-e2e-metal-assisted-4-20
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-images
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-lint
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-subsystem-aws
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-subsystem-kubeapi-aws
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-unit-test
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-edge-verify-generated-code
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-mce-images
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-okd-scos-images
• pull-ci-openshift-assisted-service-master-verify-deps
• tide

If you are trying to override a checkrun that has a space in it, you must put a double quote on the context.

Details

In response to this:

/Override ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

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.

[giladravid16]

/override ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

[openshift-ci]

@giladravid16: Overrode contexts on behalf of giladravid16: ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi, ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

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.

[giladravid16]

/override ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

[openshift-ci]

@giladravid16: Overrode contexts on behalf of giladravid16: ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi, ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-disconnected-capi ci/prow/edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi

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.

[openshift-ci]

@giladravid16: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn	fce84b4	link	false	/test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[carbonin]

Need to get this in before feature freeze so I'm merging it manually.
It was previously in the merge pool and it's been testing for over 24 hours 😫