Skip to content

AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace - #8312

Merged
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit into
openshift:mainfrom
ashishmax31:AROSLSRE-687
Jun 18, 2026
Merged

AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace#8312
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit into
openshift:mainfrom
ashishmax31:AROSLSRE-687

Conversation

@ashishmax31

@ashishmax31 ashishmax31 commented Apr 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it:

Add a new annotation constant HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation that carries
the Azure resource ID set by Cluster Service on the HostedCluster CR.
The hostedcluster controller now propagates this annotation to the
hosted control plane namespace for Azure platform clusters.

Fixes
https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/AROSLSRE-687

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

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

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Azure HostedClusters now propagate an Azure resource ID annotation into their hosted control plane namespace for Azure-based clusters; the annotation is added when present and removed when absent, preserving other namespace annotations.
  • Tests

    • Added unit tests covering propagation, removal, non-Azure behavior, and preservation of existing namespace annotations.

@openshift-merge-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: LGTM mode

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

  • @coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

  • ▶️ Resume reviews
  • 🔍 Trigger review
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Adds the exported constant HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation with value "azure.microsoft.com/hcp-cluster-azure-resource-id". The HostedCluster controller reconciliation propagates that annotation from an Azure-platform HostedCluster CR to the hosted control plane Namespace: it initializes namespace.Annotations if nil, writes the annotation value when present on the HostedCluster, and removes the annotation from the Namespace when the HostedCluster no longer has it. Non-Azure platforms are not affected; other Namespace annotations are preserved.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
  participant HC as HostedCluster CR
  participant Ctrl as HostedCluster Controller
  participant API as Kubernetes API (ControlPlane Namespace)

  HC->>Ctrl: Reconcile event / Read HostedCluster
  Ctrl->>Ctrl: Check platform == Azure?
  alt Azure platform
    alt annotation present on HC
      Ctrl->>API: GET ControlPlane Namespace
      API-->>Ctrl: Namespace object
      Ctrl->>Ctrl: Ensure namespace.Annotations initialized
      Ctrl->>API: PATCH/UPDATE Namespace with HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation
      API-->>Ctrl: 200 OK
    else annotation absent on HC
      Ctrl->>API: GET ControlPlane Namespace
      API-->>Ctrl: Namespace object
      Ctrl->>Ctrl: Remove HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation from Namespace.Annotations (if present)
      Ctrl->>API: PATCH/UPDATE Namespace
      API-->>Ctrl: 200 OK
    end
  else Non-Azure platform
    Ctrl-->>API: No annotation written or removed
  end
Loading
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 10 | ❌ 2

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 20.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
Test Structure And Quality ⚠️ Warning Test uses NewWithT instead of NewGomegaWithT (inconsistent with 18 existing tests), lacks meaningful assertion failure messages without explanatory strings. Use NewGomegaWithT(t) for consistency; add meaningful failure messages to assertions like "failed to propagate Azure resource ID annotation".
✅ Passed checks (10 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: propagating an Azure resource ID annotation to the control plane namespace, which aligns with all modified files.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Stable And Deterministic Test Names ✅ Passed All new test names in TestPropagateAzureResourceIDAnnotation are static strings without dynamic content, timestamps, UUIDs, or generated identifiers. Test titles are descriptive and deterministic.
Microshift Test Compatibility ✅ Passed Added test (TestPropagateAzureResourceIDAnnotation) is a standard Go unit test, not a Ginkgo e2e test. The custom check only applies to Ginkgo e2e tests, which are not present in this PR.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility ✅ Passed No Ginkgo e2e tests were added. The PR only adds a standard Go unit test (TestPropagateAzureResourceIDAnnotation) using testing.T, which is outside the scope of this SNO compatibility check.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility ✅ Passed PR only adds annotation constant and propagates Azure resource ID metadata to namespace; no scheduling constraints (affinity, replicas, nodeSelector, etc.) are introduced.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract ✅ Passed PR is for HyperShift operator codebase (API types, controller, and unit tests), not an OTE binary. Check is not applicable to non-OTE projects.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility ✅ Passed No Ginkgo e2e tests added. PR contains only standard Go unit tests in hostedcluster_controller_test.go with no IPv4 or connectivity assumptions.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Warning

Review ran into problems

🔥 Problems

Git: Failed to clone repository. Please run the @coderabbitai full review command to re-trigger a full review. If the issue persists, set path_filters to include or exclude specific files.


Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added area/api Indicates the PR includes changes for the API area/hypershift-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the hypershift operator and API - outside an OCP release and removed do-not-merge/needs-area labels Apr 23, 2026
@openshift-ci
openshift-ci Bot requested review from devguyio and jparrill April 23, 2026 06:54

@coderabbitai coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 2

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In
`@hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller_test.go`:
- Around line 6583-6590: The test currently duplicates the Azure resourceID
annotation propagation logic inline; instead invoke the real reconciliation path
(call HostedClusterReconciler.Reconcile or the production helper used by the
controller) using the fake client with the test's HostedCluster (hcluster) and
Namespace (ns) fixtures, then fetch the Namespace from the fake client and
assert that ns.Annotations[hyperv1.HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation] matches the
HostedCluster annotation; update the test to remove the inline propagation block
and reference HostedClusterReconciler.Reconcile (or the controller helper
function) and the hcluster/ns fixtures so the assertion verifies controller
behavior end-to-end.

In `@hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller.go`:
- Around line 1413-1421: The reconcile currently only copies
hyperv1.HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation from the HostedCluster to the
controlPlaneNamespace when present, but never deletes it when the source
annotation is removed; update the logic in the reconcile block handling
hcluster.Spec.Platform == hyperv1.AzurePlatform (around the
controlPlaneNamespace update) to check for the annotation on the HostedCluster
and if missing remove hyperv1.HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation from
controlPlaneNamespace (ensure controlPlaneNamespace.Annotations is non-nil
before modifying), then persist the change (e.g., via the existing client
update/patch call used for controlPlaneNamespace) so stale values are cleared.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

  • Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
  • Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: a1bf189c-2644-4dbd-8566-929d11783745

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6daa9ce and 621ee27.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • vendor/github.com/openshift/hypershift/api/hypershift/v1beta1/hostedcluster_types.go is excluded by !vendor/**, !**/vendor/**
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • api/hypershift/v1beta1/hostedcluster_types.go
  • hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller.go
  • hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller_test.go

Comment thread hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller_test.go Outdated
Comment thread hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller.go Outdated
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Apr 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 41.80%. Comparing base (ee9099c) to head (651fed3).
⚠️ Report is 44 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8312      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   41.75%   41.80%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         758      759       +1     
  Lines       93981    94049      +68     
==========================================
+ Hits        39240    39316      +76     
+ Misses      51988    51983       -5     
+ Partials     2753     2750       -3     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...trollers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller.go 46.04% <100.00%> (+0.15%) ⬆️

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

Flag Coverage Δ
cmd-support 35.11% <ø> (+0.09%) ⬆️
cpo-hostedcontrolplane 44.10% <ø> (ø)
cpo-other 43.45% <ø> (ø)
hypershift-operator 51.90% <100.00%> (+0.07%) ⬆️
other 31.56% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@JoelSpeed

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/approve

For API

@ashishmax31
ashishmax31 marked this pull request as draft April 23, 2026 11:59
@openshift-ci 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 Apr 23, 2026
@ashishmax31
ashishmax31 force-pushed the AROSLSRE-687 branch 2 times, most recently from e5be0cf to 4088e5f Compare April 27, 2026 08:28
@jparrill

jparrill commented May 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/retitle AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot changed the title feat(azure): propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace May 4, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label May 4, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot

openshift-ci-robot commented May 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ashishmax31: This pull request references AROSLSRE-687 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 "5.0.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

Add a new annotation constant HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation that carries
the Azure resource ID set by Cluster Service on the HostedCluster CR.
The hostedcluster controller now propagates this annotation to the
hosted control plane namespace for Azure platform clusters.

Fixes
https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/AROSLSRE-687

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

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

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

  • Azure HostedClusters now propagate an Azure resource ID annotation into their hosted control plane namespace for Azure-based clusters, improving resource tracking and identification.

  • Tests

  • Added unit tests covering propagation, removal, non-Azure behavior, and preservation of other namespace annotations.

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.

@jparrill jparrill left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Dropped a comment. Thanks!

@jparrill

jparrill commented May 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/approve

@jparrill

jparrill commented May 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

You will need to force push in order to retest the env test for KAS.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 4, 2026
@ashishmax31
ashishmax31 marked this pull request as ready for review May 21, 2026 06:44
@openshift-ci 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 May 21, 2026
@openshift-ci
openshift-ci Bot requested review from csrwng and enxebre May 21, 2026 06:45

@jparrill jparrill left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Dropped some comments. Thanks

Comment thread hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller.go Outdated
Comment thread hypershift-operator/controllers/hostedcluster/hostedcluster_controller_test.go Outdated
@openshift-merge-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aks-4-22
/test e2e-aws-4-22
/test e2e-aks
/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-aws-upgrade-hypershift-operator
/test e2e-azure-v2-self-managed
/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced
/test e2e-v2-aws
/test e2e-v2-gke

@ashishmax31

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aks-4-22

@hypershift-jira-solve-ci

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

AI Test Failure Analysis

Job: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aks | Build: 2066848222243983360 | Cost: $4.4735665000000004 | Failed step: hypershift-azure-run-e2e

View full analysis report


Generated by hypershift-analyze-e2e-failure post-step using Claude claude-opus-4-6

@ashishmax31

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/retest-required

@ashishmax31

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced

@bryan-cox

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/override "ci/prow/e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced"

This job is permafailing and I pinged the kubevirt folks earlier here - https://redhat-internal.slack.com/archives/C0B71V5TDMW/p1781616231915999

@openshift-ci

openshift-ci Bot commented Jun 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@bryan-cox: Overrode contexts on behalf of bryan-cox: ci/prow/e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced

Details

In response to this:

/override "ci/prow/e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced"

This job is permafailing and I pinged the kubevirt folks earlier here - https://redhat-internal.slack.com/archives/C0B71V5TDMW/p1781616231915999

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.

@ashishmax31

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/verified

@openshift-ci-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ashishmax31: The /verified command must be used with one of the following actions: by, later, remove, or bypass. See https://docs.ci.openshift.org/docs/architecture/jira/#premerge-verification for more information.

Details

In response to this:

/verified

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.

Comment thread api/hypershift/v1beta1/hostedcluster_types.go
@devguyio

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/hold putting a hold for @enxebre API approval

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 17, 2026
…ane namespace

  Add a new annotation constant HCPAzureResourceIDAnnotation that carries
  the Azure resource ID set by Cluster Service on the HostedCluster CR.
  The hostedcluster controller now propagates this annotation to the
  hosted control plane namespace for Azure platform clusters.

Refer https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/AROSLSRE-687 and https://issues.redhat.com/browse/AROSLSRE-447 for more details.

Signed-off-by: Ashish <asnaraya@redhat.com>
@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 17, 2026
@ashishmax31

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author
demo

@enxebre

enxebre commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 18, 2026

@bryan-cox bryan-cox left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 18, 2026
@openshift-merge-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aks-4-22
/test e2e-aws-4-22
/test e2e-aks
/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-aws-upgrade-hypershift-operator
/test e2e-azure-v2-self-managed
/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced
/test e2e-v2-aws
/test e2e-v2-gke

@openshift-ci

openshift-ci Bot commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ashishmax31, bryan-cox, JoelSpeed, jparrill

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

@bryan-cox

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/verified by @ashishmax31

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Jun 18, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@bryan-cox: This PR has been marked as verified by @ashishmax31.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @ashishmax31

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.

@bryan-cox

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/retest

@hypershift-jira-solve-ci

hypershift-jira-solve-ci Bot commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

All four agents confirm the same root cause. All four jobs failed identically — pod scheduling timeouts on the build01 CI cluster. Here's the consolidated report:

Test Failure Analysis Complete

Job Information

  • Prow Jobs: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-okd-scos-images, pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-images, pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-verify-deps, pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-security
  • Build IDs: 2067618126505185280, 2067618126295470080, 2067618430327984128, 2067618430147629056
  • PR: AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace #8312 (AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace)
  • Cluster: build01
  • State: All four jobs ended in error (not failure) — none executed any test or build logic

Test Failure Analysis

Error

Pod scheduling timeout.

0/113-115 nodes are available: 1 node(s) didn't satisfy existing pods anti-affinity rules,
1 node(s) were unschedulable, 14 node(s) didn't match Pod's node affinity/selector,
5 Insufficient memory, 92-94 node(s) had untolerated taint(s).
preemption: 0/113-115 nodes are available: 107-109 Preemption is not helpful for scheduling,
2 Insufficient memory, 4 No preemption victims found for incoming pod.

Summary

All four Prow jobs failed due to a transient CI infrastructure capacity issue on the build01 cluster — not due to any code, compilation, or test problem introduced by PR #8312. Every job pod remained stuck in Pending phase for ~30 minutes before Prow timed them out. No build logs exist because no containers ever started. The Kubernetes scheduler could not place the pods: ~80% of nodes (92–94 of 113–115) had untolerated taints, 14 didn't match node affinity selectors, 5 had insufficient memory, and the remaining nodes were unschedulable or blocked by anti-affinity rules.

Root Cause

The root cause is CI infrastructure resource exhaustion on the build01 cluster, not a code defect.

All four jobs were created between 14:33:02Z and 14:40:22Z on 2026-06-18. Their pods entered Pending state and the Kubernetes scheduler repeatedly failed to find a suitable node across 40–51 scheduling attempts over ~30 minutes. The breakdown across ~113–115 nodes:

  • ~92–94 nodes (~80%): Had untolerated taints — these nodes are reserved for other workload types and the CI job pods lacked the required tolerations
  • 14 nodes: Didn't match the pod's node affinity/selector — the multiarch-tuning-operator restricted pod placement to amd64/arm64 architecture nodes
  • 5 nodes: Had insufficient memory to accommodate the pod's resource requests
  • 1 node: Violated existing pod anti-affinity rules
  • 1–8 nodes: Were marked unschedulable (likely being drained/cordoned for maintenance)

Preemption was also ineffective: 107–109 nodes had no helpful preemption candidates, 2 still had insufficient memory even after preemption, and 4 had no viable preemption victims.

Since the pods never started, no build-log.txt was produced for any of the four jobs. There is zero evidence of compilation errors, dependency issues, security scan failures, or image build problems — the PR's code changes were never evaluated.

Recommendations
  1. Re-run all four jobs with /retest — this is a transient infrastructure issue that will resolve when cluster capacity frees up
  2. No code changes needed — PR AROSLSRE-687: propagate HCP Azure resource ID annotation to control plane namespace #8312 was never evaluated; the failures are entirely unrelated to the code changes
  3. If the issue persists after retry, it may indicate a broader build01 cluster capacity problem worth raising with the CI infrastructure team (e.g., in #forum-ocp-testplatform)
Evidence
Evidence Detail
Job state All 4 jobs: error (infrastructure error, not test failure)
Error description "Pod scheduling timeout." in all prowjob.json files
Pod phase Pending — never reached Running
Scheduling condition PodScheduled: False, reason: Unschedulable
Cluster build01
Duration stuck ~30 minutes per pod before Prow timeout
Scheduling attempts 40–51 FailedScheduling warning events per pod
Nodes with taints 92–94 of 113–115 nodes (~80%)
Nodes with wrong affinity 14 nodes
Nodes with insufficient memory 5 nodes
Build log No build-log.txt exists — containers never started
okd-scos-images timeline Created 14:33:02Z → Pending 14:39:10Z → Timeout 15:09:11Z
images timeline Created 14:33:02Z → Pending 14:39:10Z → Timeout 15:09:11Z
verify-deps timeline Created 14:33:02Z → Pending 14:40:22Z → Timeout 15:10:22Z
security timeline Created 14:33:02Z → Pending 14:40:22Z → Timeout 15:10:22Z

@openshift-merge-bot
openshift-merge-bot Bot merged commit 4f6659c into openshift:main Jun 18, 2026
49 of 50 checks passed
@openshift-ci

openshift-ci Bot commented Jun 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ashishmax31: all tests passed!

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.

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. area/api Indicates the PR includes changes for the API area/hypershift-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the hypershift operator and API - outside an OCP release jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants