-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 517
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.
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
ClusterNetworkOperator API: promote the additionalRoutingCapabilities gate #2087
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
ClusterNetworkOperator API: promote the additionalRoutingCapabilities gate #2087
Conversation
Hello @fedepaol! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api: |
Adding @asood-rh as Openshift QE and @evgenLevin and @gkopels as Telco QE |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fedepaol 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 |
8182d27
to
0f21499
Compare
@JoelSpeed For this error in
|
We have a running downstream Telco QE CI that verifies both MetalLB and frr-k8s. |
Yes, that should be permitted, why is the schema checker thinking it isn't 🤔 Out of interest, what happens if you add |
I'm curious why the schema checker didn't pick this up before, I wonder if we have broken it somehow. Doing some investigations out of band |
0f21499
to
76c7a6d
Compare
@JoelSpeed just tried but still getting " ERROR: :1:59: undefined field 'additionalRoutingCapabilities' " |
@fedepaol that's a different issue. Remember my suggestion of changing the validation to
|
5d782a3
to
55839fb
Compare
@JoelSpeed The nullable attribute helped but we need more help :/ Would you know why the promoted field
Strangely enough this isn't failing in HEAD where the validation is in |
@deads2k you might know |
4b0817f
to
cf06c80
Compare
/retest |
operator/v1/types_network.go
Outdated
@@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ type NetworkSpec struct { | |||
// respective documentation and configuration options. | |||
// +openshift:enable:FeatureGate=AdditionalRoutingCapabilities | |||
// +optional | |||
// +nullable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I did some more research and I think this is not the correct approach, please remove
I will override the no new required fields, as I think it is erroneous
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
will do!
Can you please link a sippy link in the PR description that shows us the results of your periodic that you added? Also, can we retitle to use the word promote, rather than remove. Removing the gate is a later step, and I'd like to remove the ambiguity.
Your rule needs both the |
cf06c80
to
38852c8
Compare
operator/v1/types_network.go
Outdated
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ type NetworkList struct { | |||
|
|||
// NetworkSpec is the top-level network configuration object. | |||
// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="!has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == oldSelf.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == 'Restricted' || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == 'Global'",message="invalid value for IPForwarding, valid values are 'Restricted' or 'Global'" | |||
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=AdditionalRoutingCapabilities,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" | |||
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=RouteAdvertisements,requiredFeatureGate=RouteAdvertisements;AdditionalRoutingCapabilities,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK this isn't working, all this has done is remove the validation from everywhere, damn
operator/v1/types_network.go
Outdated
@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ type NetworkList struct { | |||
|
|||
// NetworkSpec is the top-level network configuration object. | |||
// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="!has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == oldSelf.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == 'Restricted' || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.gatewayConfig.ipForwarding == 'Global'",message="invalid value for IPForwarding, valid values are 'Restricted' or 'Global'" | |||
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=AdditionalRoutingCapabilities,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" | |||
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=RouteAdvertisements,requiredFeatureGate=RouteAdvertisements;AdditionalRoutingCapabilities,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=RouteAdvertisements,requiredFeatureGate=RouteAdvertisements;AdditionalRoutingCapabilities,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" | |
// +openshift:validation:FeatureGateAwareXValidation:featureGate=RouteAdvertisements,rule="(has(self.additionalRoutingCapabilities) && ('FRR' in self.additionalRoutingCapabilities.providers)) || !has(self.defaultNetwork) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig) || !has(self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements) || self.defaultNetwork.ovnKubernetesConfig.routeAdvertisements != 'Enabled'",message="Route advertisements cannot be Enabled if 'FRR' routing capability provider is not available" |
… gate Promoting the feature gate as the deployed daemonset is being used by metallb and covered by MetalLB tests. Signed-off-by: Federico Paolinelli <[email protected]>
38852c8
to
7f92859
Compare
@fedepaol: The following tests failed, say
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. |
Promoting the feature gate as the deployed daemonset is being used by metallb and covered by MetalLB tests.
This feature is baremetal specific. By setting this flag, CNO will deploy the frr-k8s daemonset which is used (among others) by core features of metallb.
Part of this work is to move the daemonset from being deployed by the MetalLB operator to being deployed by CNO.
For the time being, we have a CI lane (gating PRs) that is flipping the feature gate and it's testing MetalLB functionalities plus another one testing the FRR-K8s functionalities.
Given the feature is baremetal specific, we need an exception to the regular process, as described here https://github.com/openshift/api?tab=readme-ov-file#defining-featuregate-e2e-tests
We added a periodic informing job here plus we have both telco and openshift QE validating MetalLB releases (and this feature as a consequence).