OCPEDGE-1593: feat(controller): skip controller name validation

[qJkee]

With new controller runtime kubernetes introduced controller name check. Because of that, graceful restarts started to fail. Because there are no other workaround - we simply disable this check

[openshift-ci-robot]

@qJkee: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-43766, 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 (4.18.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.18.0)
• bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @mmakwana30

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

In response to this:

With new controller runtime kubernetes introduced controller name check. Because of that, graceful restarts started to fail. Because there are no other workaround - we simply disable this check

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: qJkee

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [qJkee]

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

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.88889% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.09%. Comparing base (267d411) to head (a89e24b).
Report is 88 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
internal/controllers/vgmanager/controller.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #791      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   69.12%   70.09%   +0.97%     
==========================================
  Files          50       50              
  Lines        3453     3505      +52     
==========================================
+ Hits         2387     2457      +70     
+ Misses        879      864      -15     
+ Partials      187      184       -3     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ernal/controllers/lvmcluster/controller_watches.go	75.64% <100.00%> (+0.31%)	⬆️
internal/controllers/node/removal/controller.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
.../controllers/persistent-volume-claim/controller.go	85.52% <100.00%> (+0.19%)	⬆️
...ternal/controllers/persistent-volume/controller.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
internal/controllers/vgmanager/controller.go	74.13% <0.00%> (+2.40%)	⬆️

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

[suleymanakbas91]

/lgtm

[suleymanakbas91]

/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-on-pull-request"

[openshift-ci]

@suleymanakbas91: Overrode contexts on behalf of suleymanakbas91: Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-on-pull-request

In response to this:

/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-on-pull-request"

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.

[qJkee]

/test e2e-aws-hypershift

[qJkee]

/hold

[openshift-bot]

/jira refresh

The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-43766, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to be open, but it isn't
• expected the bug to target either version "4.19." or "openshift-4.19.", but it targets "4.18.0" instead
• expected the bug to be in one of the following states: NEW, ASSIGNED, POST, but it is Closed (Not a Bug) instead

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.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

The requirements for Jira bugs have changed (Jira issues linked to PRs on main branch need to target different OCP), recalculating validity.

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.

[suleymanakbas91]

@qJkee is this still needed?

[openshift-ci-robot]

@qJkee: This pull request references OCPEDGE-1593 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:

With new controller runtime kubernetes introduced controller name check. Because of that, graceful restarts started to fail. Because there are no other workaround - we simply disable this check

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.

[qJkee]

/unhold

[suleymanakbas91]

/lgtm

[suleymanakbas91]

/retest

[suleymanakbas91]

/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-enterprise-contract / lvm-operator"
/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-main-integration-tests / lvm-operator"

[openshift-ci]

@suleymanakbas91: Overrode contexts on behalf of suleymanakbas91: Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-enterprise-contract / lvm-operator, Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-main-integration-tests / lvm-operator

In response to this:

/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-enterprise-contract / lvm-operator"
/override "Red Hat Konflux / lvm-operator-main-integration-tests / lvm-operator"

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]

@qJkee: all tests passed!

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.