Skip to content

[release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping #2876

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2022
Merged

[release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping #2876

openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2022

Conversation

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot commented Dec 15, 2021

This is an automated cherry-pick of #2846

/assign QiWang19

@QiWang19
fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping
55bdfab 
openshift#2752 fixed the 1-1 mapping for kubeletconfig,
this PR fix the machineconfig name and pool name 1-1 mapping for containerruntime config.

Signed-off-by: Qi Wang <[email protected]>
@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2021
Merged
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 15, 2021

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: Bugzilla bug 2028731 has been cloned as Bugzilla bug 2032985. Retitling PR to link against new bug.
/retitle [release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping

Details

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2028731: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping

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 openshift-ci bot changed the title [release-4.9] Bug 2028731: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping [release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping Dec 15, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 15, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 15, 2021

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2032985, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.9.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.9.z)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
  • dependent bug Bugzilla bug 2028731 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
  • dependent Bugzilla bug 2028731 targets the "4.10.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.10.0
  • bug has dependents

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla ([email protected]), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping

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 openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 15, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from mtrmac and umohnani8 December 15, 2021 16:22
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 15, 2021

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: 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/okd-e2e-upgrade 55bdfab link false /test okd-e2e-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-aws-workers-rhel7 55bdfab link false /test e2e-aws-workers-rhel7
ci/prow/okd-e2e-gcp-op 55bdfab link false /test okd-e2e-gcp-op
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial 55bdfab link false /test e2e-aws-serial
ci/prow/okd-e2e-aws 55bdfab link false /test okd-e2e-aws
ci/prow/e2e-aws-workers-rhel8 55bdfab link false /test e2e-aws-workers-rhel8
ci/prow/e2e-aws-upgrade-single-node 55bdfab link false /test e2e-aws-upgrade-single-node
ci/prow/e2e-aws-disruptive 55bdfab link false /test e2e-aws-disruptive

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.

@QiWang19
Copy link
Member

QiWang19 commented Dec 21, 2021

/assign @yuqi-zhang

yuqi-zhang
yuqi-zhang reviewed Dec 21, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@yuqi-zhang yuqi-zhang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good in terms of code, but just curious, what is the reasoning behind the backport/how far would you like to backport this? The original bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2028731 was filed against 4.10, and while the behaviour is not ideal for previous versions, do you know if there's an explicit use case for the backport?

@QiWang19
Copy link
Member

QiWang19 commented Dec 22, 2021

The same kind of fix for kubeletconfig #2752 was backported from 4.7. I thought this containerruntieconfig also needed to be backported to keep compatability.

@rphillips
Copy link
Contributor

rphillips commented Jan 20, 2022

/lgtm
/retest-required

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 20, 2022
@QiWang19
Copy link
Member

QiWang19 commented Jan 20, 2022

@yuqi-zhang could this be approved?

yuqi-zhang
yuqi-zhang approved these changes Jan 21, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@yuqi-zhang yuqi-zhang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/label backport-risk-assessed

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the backport-risk-assessed Indicates a PR to a release branch has been evaluated and considered safe to accept. label Jan 21, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 21, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: openshift-cherrypick-robot, rphillips, yuqi-zhang

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 openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 21, 2022
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

6 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 21, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

19 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 24, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jan 25, 2022

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@yuqi-zhang
Copy link
Contributor

yuqi-zhang commented Jan 25, 2022

/hold

Not sure why this is infinitely retesting given required jobs have passed. This just needs cherry-pick-approval from QE which... would that be from node QE?

Please unhold when that label is added, thanks

@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 Jan 25, 2022
@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

kikisdeliveryservice commented Feb 8, 2022

/skip

@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

kikisdeliveryservice commented Feb 8, 2022

I've been told that he bot will perpetually retest-required even if all required tests pass if any tests failed. so we have to skip those.

removing hold now since this just needs a cherrypick approved label

/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 Feb 8, 2022
@kikisdeliveryservice
Copy link
Contributor

kikisdeliveryservice commented Feb 8, 2022

@QiWang19 @rphillips can you get your QE to approve the backport?

@sunilcio
Copy link

sunilcio commented Feb 15, 2022

/label cherry-pick-approved

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Feb 15, 2022
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit d84a7f9 into openshift:release-4.9 Feb 15, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 15, 2022

@openshift-cherrypick-robot: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 2032985 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

Details

In response to this:

[release-4.9] Bug 2032985: fixes 1 to 1 containerruntime config mapping

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

Reviewers

@yuqi-zhang yuqi-zhang yuqi-zhang approved these changes

@mtrmac mtrmac Awaiting requested review from mtrmac

@umohnani8 umohnani8 Awaiting requested review from umohnani8

Assignees

@rphillips rphillips

@yuqi-zhang yuqi-zhang

@QiWang19 QiWang19

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. backport-risk-assessed Indicates a PR to a release branch has been evaluated and considered safe to accept. bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@openshift-cherrypick-robot @QiWang19 @rphillips @openshift-bot @yuqi-zhang @kikisdeliveryservice @sunilcio @openshift-merge-robot