[WIP] OCPBUGS-1689: Clear route admission status on route and namespace labels change #849

gcs278 · 2022-10-25T22:39:25Z

OCPBUGS-1689: Add the route-status control loop for clearing route admitted status when labels change on routes and namespaces. Refactored route_status.go and functions to be organized under the route-status directory. Added unit testing for route_status.go with the addition of the fake_client.go to simplify future creation of fake clients for unit testing.

pkg/operator/controller/ingress/controller.go: Moving functions from/to route_status.go.
pkg/operator/controller/route-metrics/controller.go: De-duplicate logic between route-status and route-metric.
pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go: New control loop that reconciles route status if a route or namespace label changes.
pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller_test.go: Unit testing for the new control loop using fake client.
pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status.go: Moved from pkg/operator/controller/ingress to be co-located with route status control loop.
pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status_test.go: New route_status.go unit testing using fake clients.
pkg/operator/operator.go: Start the new route_status control loop and share the cache with the route_metric control loop.
test/e2e/router_status_test.go: E2E test for route status control loop.
test/unit/fake_client.go: Added common fake client initialization functions.
test/unit/utils.go: Added IngressController, Namespace, and Route builder functions to for reusable helper functions.

openshift-ci-robot · 2022-10-25T22:39:29Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1689, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.12.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

WIP

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 · 2022-10-25T22:39:51Z

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

openshift-ci-robot · 2022-10-31T19:59:04Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1689, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.13.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

Details

In response to this:

OCPBUGS-1689: Add the route-status control loop for clearing route admitted status when labels change on routes and namespaces. Refactored route_status.go and functions to be organized under the route-status directory. Added unit testing for route_status.go with the addition of the fake_client.go to simplify future creation of fake clients for unit testing.

pkg/operator/controller/ingress/controller.go: Moving functions from/to route_status.go.

pkg/operator/controller/route-metrics/controller.go: De-duplicate logic between route-status and route-metric.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go: New control loop that reconciles route status if a route or namespace label changes.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller_test.go: Unit testing for the new control loop using fake client.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status.go: Moved from pkg/operator/controller/ingress to be co-located with route status control loop.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status_test.go: New route_status.go unit testing using fake clients.

pkg/operator/operator.go: Start the new route_status control loop and share the cache with the route_metric control loop.

test/e2e/router_status_test.go: E2E test for route status control loop.

test/unit/fake_client.go: Added common fake client initialization functions.

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.

gcs278 · 2022-10-31T20:04:29Z

/refresh jira

gcs278 · 2022-10-31T20:15:36Z

/jira refresh

openshift-ci-robot · 2022-10-31T20:15:43Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1689, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (4.13.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.13.0)
bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @ShudiLi

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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.

… pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status.go

openshift-ci · 2023-02-17T16:56:07Z

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

openshift-ci · 2023-02-17T16:56:21Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from alebedev87. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

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

gcs278

Thanks for the very detailed review.

gcs278 · 2023-02-14T20:02:35Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-metrics/controller.go

-		namespacesSet.Insert(namespaceList.Items[i].Name)
+	namespacesInShard, err := routestatus.GetNamespacesSelectedByIngressController(r.cache, ingressController)
+	if err != nil {
+		return reconcile.Result{}, err


Good catch, I agree, fixed via custom error type.

gcs278 · 2023-02-14T20:03:58Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go

+// New creates the route status controller. This is the controller that handles reconciling route status and keeping
+// it in sync.


gcs278 · 2023-02-14T20:20:36Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go

+		return nil, err
+	}
+	// Add watch for changes in Route
+	if err := c.Watch(source.NewKindWithCache(&routev1.Route{}, cache), &handler.EnqueueRequestForObject{}); err != nil {


Yea so we actually talked something very similar in slack:

Grant Spence
[5:51 PM]
Hey Miciah, when it comes to adding a control loop to clear route status if a route label changed, is it worth adding route.status.labels to the API like we did with IngressControllers? So that we can detect only when labels change on a route? Otherwise, I reconcile any route object updates and check if they are still admitted to their status-claimed ICs
Miciah
[6:01 PM]
You mean change the route API?
Grant Spence
[6:01 PM]
yep, as we did with the ingress controller api
Miciah
[6:02 PM]
It seems heavy-handed. That's a lot of extra status (and status updates).
Grant Spence
[6:03 PM]
Yea I don't disagree

I'm assuming this filtering would require keeping state via route status. It's an admirable thing to do, but is going to require more churn with APIs.

Do you have an idea on how to do this without updating the API? I mean, we could keep state in memory, with a map of routes-to-route-labels and namespaces-to-namespace-labels, but I'm a bit ambivalent on whether it's worth it.

I feel like namespaces don't change often. And for routes, though they may get updated more often than namespaces (with status changes), we are reconciling that individual route (that involves a GET for each IC it's admitted to, and if that IC as a namespace selector, a GET for a namespace, I've since updated it use a cache). It would add efficiency, but not sure if it's worth the maintenance burden.

What are your thoughts?

gcs278 · 2023-02-14T20:21:22Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go

+
+	routeList := routev1.RouteList{}
+	if err := r.cache.List(context.Background(), &routeList, client.InNamespace(ns.Name)); err != nil {
+		log.Error(err, "failed to list routes for namespace", "related", obj.GetSelfLink())


gcs278 · 2023-02-14T20:21:27Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go

+	}
+
+	for _, route := range routeList.Items {
+		log.Info("queueing route", "name", route.Name, "related", obj.GetSelfLink())


gcs278 · 2023-02-16T21:43:25Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status_test.go

+			routes: routev1.RouteList{
+				Items: []routev1.Route{
+					*newRouteWithLabelWithAdmittedStatuses("foo-route", "ns", "shard-label", "foo-ic", "bar-ic"),
+					*newRouteWithLabelWithAdmittedStatuses("bar-route", "ns2", "", "baz-ic", "foo-ic", "bar-ic"),


Wow, great catch. I fixed this to exclusively test namespaceSelectors, and exposed a bug. https://github.com/openshift/cluster-ingress-operator/pull/849/files/d0e9ac4aac19304711f167a15390119f7673f404..d62a15ffe9788b63891f65e5d2ad2bc5bf407a1b#diff-f45bfd10ac3726fa96fa3ebc79b5d614b2d0b00943f33a1132fb963885021c15R119 wasn't working when route selectors were Nil, it was just clearing everything, since nothing ever matched a Nil Route Selector (should default to true if Nil).

I know this came up before, Arkadeep exposed it when doing the route-metrics controller and I think you and I specifically talked about this. So, it looks like this is currently a minor bug in the code. It only happens when you change a namespace or route selector, and the routeSelector is Nil, it will clear ALL routes admitted to that IC, once. I think it's a minor bug because the routes will just get re-admitted, but is unneeded churn.

gcs278 · 2023-02-16T21:43:46Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status_test.go

+			routes: routev1.RouteList{
+				Items: []routev1.Route{
+					*newRouteWithLabelWithAdmittedStatuses("foo-route", "ns", "shard-label", "foo-ic", "bar-ic"),
+					*newRouteWithLabelWithAdmittedStatuses("bar-route", "ns2", "", "baz-ic", "foo-ic", "bar-ic"),


Hmm, this wasn't what I wanted actually, I don't want any route labels or route selectors, so removed this.

gcs278 · 2023-02-16T21:47:28Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status_test.go

+			if err := client.List(context.Background(), &actualRoutes); err == nil {
+				for _, expectedRoute := range tc.expectedRoutes.Items {
+					// Find the actual route that we should compare status with this expected route
+					var actualRoute routev1.Route
+					for _, route := range actualRoutes.Items {
+						if route.Name == expectedRoute.Name {
+							actualRoute = route
+						}
+					}
+					assert.Equal(t, expectedRoute.Status, actualRoute.Status, "route name", expectedRoute.Name)
+				}
+			} else {
+				t.Errorf("error retrieving all from client: %v", err)


gcs278 · 2023-02-16T21:54:35Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status_test.go

+// newIngressControllerWithSelectors returns a new ingresscontroller with the specified name,
+// routeSelectors, and namespaceSelectors based on the parameters.
+func newIngressControllerWithSelectors(name, routeMatchLabel, routeMatchExpression, namespaceMatchLabel, namespaceMatchExpression string) *operatorv1.IngressController {
+	ingresscontroller := operatorv1.IngressController{
+		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
+			Name:      name,
+			Namespace: operatorcontroller.DefaultOperatorNamespace,
+		},
+	}
+	if len(routeMatchLabel) != 0 {
+		ingresscontroller.Spec.RouteSelector = &metav1.LabelSelector{
+			MatchLabels: map[string]string{
+				"type": routeMatchLabel,
+			},
+		}
+	}
+	if len(routeMatchExpression) != 0 {
+		ingresscontroller.Spec.RouteSelector = &metav1.LabelSelector{
+			MatchExpressions: []metav1.LabelSelectorRequirement{
+				{
+					Key:      "type",
+					Operator: metav1.LabelSelectorOpIn,
+					Values:   []string{routeMatchExpression},
+				},
+			},
+		}
+	}
+	if len(namespaceMatchLabel) != 0 {
+		ingresscontroller.Spec.NamespaceSelector = &metav1.LabelSelector{
+			MatchLabels: map[string]string{
+				"type": namespaceMatchLabel,
+			},
+		}
+	}
+	if len(namespaceMatchExpression) != 0 {
+		ingresscontroller.Spec.NamespaceSelector = &metav1.LabelSelector{
+			MatchExpressions: []metav1.LabelSelectorRequirement{
+				{
+					Key:      "type",
+					Operator: metav1.LabelSelectorOpIn,
+					Values:   []string{namespaceMatchExpression},
+				},
+			},
+		}
+	}
+	return &ingresscontroller
+}
+
+// newNamespace returns a new namespace with the specified name
+// and if label exists, with that label
+func newNamespace(name, label string) *corev1.Namespace {
+	namespace := corev1.Namespace{
+		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
+			Name: name,
+		},
+	}
+	if len(label) != 0 {
+		namespace.ObjectMeta.Labels = map[string]string{"type": label}
+	}
+	return &namespace
+}
+
+// newRouteWithAdmittedStatuses returns a new route that is admitted by ingress controllers.
+func newRouteWithLabelWithAdmittedStatuses(name, namespace, label string, icAdmitted ...string) *routev1.Route {
+	route := newRouteWithAdmittedStatuses(name, icAdmitted...)
+	route.ObjectMeta.Namespace = namespace
+	if len(label) != 0 {
+		route.Labels = map[string]string{
+			"type": label,
+		}
+	}
+	return route
+}
+
+// newRouteWithAdmittedStatuses returns a new route that is admitted by ingress controllers.
+func newRouteWithAdmittedStatuses(name string, icAdmitted ...string) *routev1.Route {
+	route := routev1.Route{
+		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
+			Name: name,
+		},
+	}
+	if len(icAdmitted) != 0 {
+		for _, ic := range icAdmitted {
+			route.Status.Ingress = append(route.Status.Ingress, routev1.RouteIngress{
+				RouterName: ic,
+				Conditions: []routev1.RouteIngressCondition{
+					{
+						Type:   routev1.RouteAdmitted,
+						Status: "True",
+					},
+				},
+			})
+		}
+	}
+	return &route
+}


Yes, after doing a lot of unit tests, I just started using pointers in all of my test cases, because some functions we are testing take pointers, and we can test Nil parameters. These functions don't need to return pointers, just was a force of habit, and felt like it didn't hurt since a function in the future might need pointers.

Oh yes, I do really like that pattern. Let me see if I can replicate.

gcs278 · 2023-02-17T17:00:55Z

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status_test.go

+					t.Errorf("error ingress controller route: %v", err)
+				}
+			}
+			for _, route := range tc.routes.Items {
+				if err := client.Create(context.Background(), &route); err != nil {
+					t.Errorf("error creating route: %v", err)
+				}
+			}
+			for _, ns := range tc.namespace.Items {
+				if err := client.Create(context.Background(), &ns); err != nil {
+					t.Errorf("error creating ns: %v", err)
+				}
+			}
+
+			if errs := ClearRoutesNotAdmittedByIngress(client, tc.ingressController); tc.expectedErr && len(errs) == 0 {
+				t.Errorf("expected errors, got no errors")
+			} else if !tc.expectedErr && len(errs) != 0 {
+				t.Errorf("did not expected errors: %v", errs)


gcs278 · 2023-02-17T18:55:46Z

/hold
Things left for me TODO

~~Try to refactor unit test code with builder functions~~ EDIT: Done
Analyze startup time of CIO with new change

openshift-ci-robot · 2023-02-17T21:04:36Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1689, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (4.13.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.13.0)
bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @ShudiLi

Details

In response to this:

OCPBUGS-1689: Add the route-status control loop for clearing route admitted status when labels change on routes and namespaces. Refactored route_status.go and functions to be organized under the route-status directory. Added unit testing for route_status.go with the addition of the fake_client.go to simplify future creation of fake clients for unit testing.

pkg/operator/controller/ingress/controller.go: Moving functions from/to route_status.go.

pkg/operator/controller/route-metrics/controller.go: De-duplicate logic between route-status and route-metric.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go: New control loop that reconciles route status if a route or namespace label changes.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller_test.go: Unit testing for the new control loop using fake client.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status.go: Moved from pkg/operator/controller/ingress to be co-located with route status control loop.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status_test.go: New route_status.go unit testing using fake clients.

pkg/operator/operator.go: Start the new route_status control loop and share the cache with the route_metric control loop.

test/e2e/router_status_test.go: E2E test for route status control loop.

test/unit/fake_client.go: Added common fake client initialization functions.

test/unit/utils.go: Added IngressController, Namespace, and Route builder functions to for reusable helper functions.

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.

gcs278 · 2023-02-17T21:12:28Z

My commits are pretty messy I think better to squash:
/label tide/merge-method-squash

ShudiLi · 2023-02-20T09:56:09Z

From QE side, after rebel the namespace, the route was not admitted anymore.
1.
%oc label namespace test type=loadbalancer

% oc get route router-loadbalancer-test -oyaml
...
status:
ingress:

conditions:
- lastTransitionTime: "2023-02-20T09:44:54Z"
  status: "True"
  type: Admitted
  host: router-loadbalancer-test-test.apps.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerCanonicalHostname: router-default.apps.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerName: default
  wildcardPolicy: None
conditions:
- lastTransitionTime: "2023-02-20T09:44:54Z"
  status: "True"
  type: Admitted
  host: router-loadbalancer-test-test.apps.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerCanonicalHostname: router-loadbalancer.loadbalancer.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerName: loadbalancer
  wildcardPolicy: None
  %

% oc label namespace test type=opt-out --overwrite

% oc get route router-loadbalancer-test -oyaml
...
status:
ingress:

conditions:
- lastTransitionTime: "2023-02-20T09:44:54Z"
  status: "True"
  type: Admitted
  host: router-loadbalancer-test-test.apps.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerCanonicalHostname: router-default.apps.ci-ln-kbq4082-72292.origin-ci-int-gce.dev.rhcloud.com
  routerName: default
  wildcardPolicy: None
  %

/label qe-approved
thanks

alebedev87 · 2023-03-09T09:29:43Z

/unassign

I withdraw myself from the review because the PR has enough of quality reviews already made.

openshift-merge-robot · 2023-03-09T09:29:52Z

PR needs rebase.

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/test-infra repository.

gcs278 · 2023-04-13T11:31:28Z

Still holding. Going to push through #869, which is a simpler PR that introduces the builder pattern that these unit tests need.

openshift-ci · 2023-05-24T20:17:52Z

@gcs278: The following tests 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/e2e-gcp-ovn-serial	`9c6165a`	link	true	`/test e2e-gcp-ovn-serial`
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-ovn	`efc08f9`	link	false	`/test e2e-gcp-ovn`
ci/prow/e2e-hypershift	`efc08f9`	link	true	`/test e2e-hypershift`

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

gcs278 · 2023-07-28T15:31:38Z

Marking back to WIP. This went stale. I think we need to rethink status and status clearing.

gcs278 · 2023-08-16T17:41:49Z

/payload ?

gcs278 · 2023-09-25T22:59:42Z

Closing in favor of a router-specific implementation which is much cleaner (in my humble opinion): openshift/router#514

openshift-ci-robot · 2023-09-25T22:59:44Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-1689. The bug has been updated to no longer refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

OCPBUGS-1689: Add the route-status control loop for clearing route admitted status when labels change on routes and namespaces. Refactored route_status.go and functions to be organized under the route-status directory. Added unit testing for route_status.go with the addition of the fake_client.go to simplify future creation of fake clients for unit testing.

pkg/operator/controller/ingress/controller.go: Moving functions from/to route_status.go.

pkg/operator/controller/route-metrics/controller.go: De-duplicate logic between route-status and route-metric.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller.go: New control loop that reconciles route status if a route or namespace label changes.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/controller_test.go: Unit testing for the new control loop using fake client.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status.go: Moved from pkg/operator/controller/ingress to be co-located with route status control loop.

pkg/operator/controller/route-status/router_status_test.go: New route_status.go unit testing using fake clients.

pkg/operator/operator.go: Start the new route_status control loop and share the cache with the route_metric control loop.

test/e2e/router_status_test.go: E2E test for route status control loop.

test/unit/fake_client.go: Added common fake client initialization functions.

test/unit/utils.go: Added IngressController, Namespace, and Route builder functions to for reusable helper functions.

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 added the jira/severity-moderate Referenced Jira bug's severity is moderate for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 25, 2022

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Oct 25, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 25, 2022

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 28, 2022

gcs278 force-pushed the router-status-namespace-route-labels branch from 57baeef to db6b9ab Compare October 28, 2022 18:41

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Oct 28, 2022

gcs278 force-pushed the router-status-namespace-route-labels branch 6 times, most recently from c51a3e3 to 07baa05 Compare October 31, 2022 19:57

gcs278 marked this pull request as ready for review October 31, 2022 20:03

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 31, 2022

openshift-ci bot requested review from frobware and lmzuccarelli October 31, 2022 20:04

openshift-ci bot requested a review from ShudiLi October 31, 2022 20:15

gcs278 force-pushed the router-status-namespace-route-labels branch 2 times, most recently from ac63a2b to 57bdd89 Compare October 31, 2022 20:24

Moved and renamed pkg/operator/controller/ingress/router_status.go ->…

d0e9ac4

… pkg/operator/controller/route-status/route_status.go

gcs278 force-pushed the router-status-namespace-route-labels branch from 57bdd89 to 9b79503 Compare October 31, 2022 20:26

Unit test cleanup, comment cleanup, and unused variable cleanup

161f283

gcs278 force-pushed the router-status-namespace-route-labels branch from 797d7bb to 161f283 Compare February 17, 2023 17:01

gcs278 commented Feb 17, 2023

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 17, 2023

Added IngressController, Route, and Namespace builders for unit test

efc08f9

This was referenced Feb 17, 2023

Add new unit test for configurable-route control loop. #859

Closed

OCPBUGS-3541: Don't create route metrics for ingress controllers that are not admitted #869

Merged

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Feb 17, 2023

openshift-ci bot added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Feb 17, 2023

openshift-ci bot unassigned alebedev87 Mar 9, 2023

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 9, 2023

Miciah mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2023

OCPBUGS-10714: gatewayclass: Update for OSSM 2.4 API change #901

Merged

gcs278 changed the title ~~OCPBUGS-1689: Clear route admission status on route and namespace labels change~~ [WIP] OCPBUGS-1689: Clear route admission status on route and namespace labels change Jul 28, 2023

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 28, 2023

gcs278 mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2023

[WIP] OCPBUGS-1689: Router clear admitted status on label changes openshift/router#514

Closed

gcs278 closed this Sep 25, 2023

		// New creates the route status controller. This is the controller that handles reconciling route status and keeping
		// it in sync.

[WIP] OCPBUGS-1689: Clear route admission status on route and namespace labels change #849

[WIP] OCPBUGS-1689: Clear route admission status on route and namespace labels change #849

Uh oh!

Conversation

gcs278 commented Oct 25, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 25, 2022

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 25, 2022

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 31, 2022

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Oct 31, 2022

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Oct 31, 2022

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Oct 31, 2022

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 17, 2023

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 17, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Feb 17, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Feb 17, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Feb 17, 2023

Uh oh!

ShudiLi commented Feb 20, 2023

Uh oh!

alebedev87 commented Mar 9, 2023

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-robot commented Mar 9, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Apr 13, 2023

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented May 24, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Jul 28, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Aug 16, 2023

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented Sep 25, 2023

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Sep 25, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

10 participants

gcs278 commented Oct 25, 2022 •

edited

Loading

gcs278 commented Feb 17, 2023 •

edited

Loading