Skip to content

Conversation

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, use fixes #<issue_number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, where issue_number might be a GitHub issue, or a Jira story:
Fixes #

Checklist

  • Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.
  • Relevant issues have been referenced.
  • This change includes docs.
  • This change includes unit tests.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. do-not-merge/needs-area labels Mar 14, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from csrwng and sjenning March 14, 2025 19:23
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the area/control-plane-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the control plane operator - in an OCP release label Mar 14, 2025
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 14, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign bryan-cox for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

It is expected that all tests will fail as this is consuming unmerged changes to the openshift/api dependency.

@rtheis
Copy link
Contributor

rtheis commented Mar 15, 2025

@jonesbr17 ptal

@everettraven everettraven changed the title WIP: Update KAS structured authentication configuration generation logic to use new uid and extra field WIP: CNTRLPLANE-334: Update KAS structured authentication configuration generation logic to use new uid and extra field Mar 18, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Mar 18, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 18, 2025

@everettraven: This pull request references CNTRLPLANE-334 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 story to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, use fixes #<issue_number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, where issue_number might be a GitHub issue, or a Jira story:
Fixes #

Checklist

  • Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.
  • Relevant issues have been referenced.
  • This change includes docs.
  • This change includes unit tests.

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-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 24, 2025
@everettraven everettraven force-pushed the feature/oidc-uid-extra branch from a0fc23a to c3f2ffa Compare March 24, 2025 14:24
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 24, 2025
@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/testwith openshift/hypershift/main/e2e-aws openshift/api#2234

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

@enxebre
Copy link
Member

enxebre commented Mar 25, 2025

/label tide/merge-method-squash

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Mar 25, 2025
@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

1 similar comment
@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/payload-with-prs 4.19 ci blocking openshift/api#2234

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 26, 2025

@everettraven: trigger 4 job(s) of type blocking for the ci release of OCP 4.19

  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/cb5c9ea0-0a33-11f0-8c09-1b0434e6e3a5-0

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/payload-abort

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 26, 2025

@everettraven: aborted active payload jobs for pull request #5840

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added area/api Indicates the PR includes changes for the API area/cli Indicates the PR includes changes for CLI labels Mar 26, 2025
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 26, 2025
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 28, 2025

@everettraven: trigger 4 job(s) of type blocking for the ci release of OCP 4.19

  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-upgrade-from-stable-4.18-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
  • periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-ovn

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/6f211ab0-0bfc-11f0-87b2-e5e70c1f99a6-0

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 31, 2025
required:
- name
type: object
oidcProviders:
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems wrong. Digging.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Apr 1, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the area/ci-tooling Indicates the PR includes changes for CI or tooling label Apr 1, 2025
@everettraven everettraven force-pushed the feature/oidc-uid-extra branch 3 times, most recently from e83d621 to ab7df82 Compare April 7, 2025 12:17
out.Username = username
out.Groups = groups

if featuregate.Gates.Enabled(featuregate.ExternalOIDCWithUIDAndExtraClaimMappings) {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TODO: pending #5976 merging, will need to update how the feature gates are being used here

@everettraven everettraven force-pushed the feature/oidc-uid-extra branch from 1196519 to 8d7c47f Compare April 15, 2025 17:33
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the area/hypershift-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the hypershift operator and API - outside an OCP release label Apr 15, 2025
Comment on lines 40 to 42
// TODO: using the default compiler means that we are allowing CEL library usage for the Kube version that maps to our
// dependency import. This should align with the version of Kubernetes that will be running for a guest cluster instead
// since that is what will actually load and validate the configuration.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

2 lines of thought here:

  1. We leave this as-is. This means we validate against progressively newer validations every time we bump our kube dependencies. Should generally be safe as kube tries to avoid breaking changes and is heavily concerned with backwards compatibility. However, we may end up with false-positives where a CEL library is available in the version we are using for our dependency, but not available on the KAS being deployed. Seems like a non-starter, but sharing my train of thought here for others.
  2. We implement a system to map an OCP version --> Kubernetes version. This seems like the only reasonable way to really approach this. In practice, I'm not sure how one would extract this information from the HostedControlPlane resource as it doesn't seem to include the OCP release version it is using in the spec anywhere. Doing some digging on this.

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 16, 2025

@everettraven: 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-aws 400c710 link true /test e2e-aws
ci/prow/verify 400c710 link true /test verify
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 400c710 link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of #6073

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 1, 2025
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

PR needs rebase.

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.

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

Labels

area/api Indicates the PR includes changes for the API area/ci-tooling Indicates the PR includes changes for CI or tooling area/cli Indicates the PR includes changes for CLI area/control-plane-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the control plane operator - in an OCP release area/hypershift-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the hypershift operator and API - outside an OCP release do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants