Always populate volume status from node#16384
Always populate volume status from node#16384openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit intoopenshift:masterfrom
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/M
|
[test] |
| glog.Errorf("Failed to mark the volume as attached: %v", err) | ||
| continue | ||
| } | ||
| adc.processVolumesInUse(nodeName, node.Status.VolumesInUse, true /* forceUnmount */) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We use this to build openshift start kubernetes controller-manager which is supposed to be true to the upstream. Unconditional carries like this shouldn't be added and we are actively trying to remove the ones we have.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gnufied is not allowed to let 52221 miss for 1.9. But this must be carried in 3.7+ even if that doesn't happen. This is mission critical.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gnufied is not allowed to let 52221 miss for 1.9. But this must be carried in 3.7+ even if that doesn't happen. This is mission critical.
This is currently listed as a carry. As such, it will prevent convergence with upstream. If its related to an upstream pull, then it doesn't cause us to diverge forever and its a risk assessment, not a case of preventing any future reconciliation.
Is this just an upstream pick?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is a pick, but if upstream fails to merge, it is a carry. you tell me :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is a pick, but if upstream fails to merge, it is a carry. you tell me :)
Its a pick, reference the upstream number. If you don't, we'll never know that we either have to never converge onto upstream or find another way to handle it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
okay I am happy rewording the commit. doesn't seem like a biggie.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright I have updated this PR to have upstream's PR ref. number.
|
This is for customer bug, upstream is reluctant to merge this late in the 1.8 release. This is approved and ready to hit 1.9 when code re-opens. @eparis approved this for carry Upstream here: kubernetes/kubernetes#52221 |
childsb
changed the title
gnufied
force-pushed
the
fix-detach-delay
branch
from
19cf5a8 to
263a57e
Compare
|
/test cmd |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: eparis, gnufied The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:You can indicate your approval by writing |
openshift-merge-robot
added
the
approved
|
/retest |
|
/test all [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge] |
|
@gnufied: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 16384, 16327, 16199, 16286, 16378) |
6 participants
Fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1481729
Actual Upstream PR - kubernetes/kubernetes#52221
But we think, we won't be able to get this in 1.8