Skip to content
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

WIP: DNM: per-nodegroup SCC toggle #1124

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

WIP: DNM: per-nodegroup SCC toggle #1124

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+634 −97

Conversation

ffromani
Copy link
Member

WIP DNM for testing purposes atm

@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 Dec 17, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from swatisehgal and Tal-or December 17, 2024 14:53
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 17, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ffromani

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:

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 Dec 17, 2024
@ffromani ffromani force-pushed the nodegroup-scc-v2 branch 6 times, most recently from 64504bf to d5c1dae Compare December 18, 2024 16:57
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Dec 20, 2024
@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator

Tal-or commented Dec 26, 2024

If we're going with the direction of per-nodegroup I suggest to drop the global annotation because it's redundant.
A version with the global API was not released yet, so we can still remove the API without dealing with backward compatibility.

@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator

Tal-or commented Dec 26, 2024

Tests locally, looking good:
custom policy is present

sh-5.1# ls /etc/selinux/rte.cil 
/etc/selinux/rte.cil

machineconfig is present

➜  numaresources-operator git:(main) ✗ oc get mc 51-numaresourcesoperator-worker-cnf 
NAME                                  GENERATEDBYCONTROLLER   IGNITIONVERSION   AGE
51-numaresourcesoperator-worker-cnf

pods are running:

➜  numaresources-operator git:(main) ✗ oc get pods                                  
NAME                                                READY   STATUS    RESTARTS   AGE
numaresources-controller-manager-6f48967784-q5wtv   1/1     Running   0          116m
numaresourcesoperator-worker-cnf-4nj5r              2/2     Running   0          27m

@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator

Tal-or commented Dec 26, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Deleting the annotation under the nodeGroup didn't take affect.
The MachineConfig is still present.

@ffromani
dep: bump deployer to v0.21.3
ddc88e1 
consume upstream fixes

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@ffromani
rte: ship SCC v2
604a51e 
incorporate the SCC v2 as provided by deployer <= 0.21.3

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@ffromani
api: nrop: add per-nodegroup annotations
8274e2f 
there are cases on which object (aka cluster) level annotations
are not good enough, so add limited per-nodegroup annotation.

This is another strong hint we should have had an object per nodegroup
rather than a single object for all nodegroups.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 7, 2025
@ffromani
rte: use per-nodegroup annotations
e8eb141 
Now that we have per-nodegroup annotation,
we can enable back the custom selinux policy
per-nodegroup (vs per-cluster), allowing granular upgrades.

Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
@openshift-ci OpenShift CI
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 7, 2025

@ffromani: The following test 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/ci-e2e-install-hypershift e8eb141 link true /test ci-e2e-install-hypershift

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.

@ffromani
Copy link
Member Author

ffromani commented Jan 8, 2025

/retest

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@swatisehgal swatisehgal Awaiting requested review from swatisehgal

@Tal-or Tal-or Awaiting requested review from Tal-or

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@ffromani @Tal-or @openshift-merge-robot