Skip to content

Conversation

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor

@lucab lucab commented Jan 15, 2019

This adds a context to remote cincinnati calls. The topmost context is
left floating as the caller is not context-aware at the moment.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 15, 2019
}
}

updates, err := checkForUpdate(clusterID, upstream, channel, currentVersion)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would assume this is the only place that needs the ctx, why do any body up the chain care about ctx for checking updates?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can cut the chain at any arbitrary point that you prefer, but please do note that the topmost Until layer already takes a stop channel, but doesn't propagate that down. I'd rather suggest to leave the TODO here and later fix the caller to unify the cancellation chain.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI I landed a fix in k8s master to propagate the context through Until: kubernetes/kubernetes#72928

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Jan 15, 2019

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 15, 2019
@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Jan 17, 2019

/test e2e-aws
/test integration

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Jan 30, 2019

This was on hold due to the freeze being in place at the time, it should be fine now.

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 30, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

1 similar comment
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 20, 2019
@lucab lucab force-pushed the ups/cincinnati-ctx branch from 3aeed76 to 9fcd4dd Compare February 25, 2019 09:30
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: lucab
To fully approve this pull request, please assign additional approvers.
We suggest the following additional approver: smarterclayton

If they are not already assigned, you can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @smarterclayton in a comment when ready.

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:

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 openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 25, 2019
This adds a context to remote cincinnati calls. The topmost context is
left floating as the caller is not context-aware at the moment.
@lucab lucab force-pushed the ups/cincinnati-ctx branch from 9fcd4dd to 278bfb4 Compare February 25, 2019 09:49
@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Feb 25, 2019

Rebased, bump for a review.

As stated, I can cut the context wherever you prefer right now, but I personally think that longer term it makes sense to wire all contexts to the top-level one.

@lucab
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucab commented Apr 11, 2019

Gentle ping for a review.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@lucab: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-upgrade 278bfb4 link /test e2e-gcp-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-gcp 278bfb4 link /test e2e-gcp
ci/prow/e2e-upgrade 278bfb4 link /test e2e-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e 278bfb4 link /test e2e

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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.

@wking
Copy link
Member

wking commented Jul 18, 2020

Carried in #410.

/close

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@wking: Closed this PR.

Details

In response to this:

Carried in #410.

/close

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.

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

Labels

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.

5 participants