SPLAT-2206: Added AWS dedicated host support #2484
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@vr4manta: This pull request references SPLAT-2206 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 "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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. |
1 similar comment
|
@vr4manta: This pull request references SPLAT-2206 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 "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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. |
|
Hello @vr4manta! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api: |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
size/S
|
Does this API already exist upstream in CAPA? |
vr4manta
force-pushed
the
SPLAT-2206
branch
from
165b8e8 to
92afa52
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
size/M
@JoelSpeed Yes, this is already merged and pulled into OpenShift. Working on just the static version since dynamic is not finished upstream. |
|
/assign |
vr4manta
changed the title
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
vr4manta
force-pushed
the
SPLAT-2206
branch
3 times, most recently
from
0fcff1c to
b088b27
Compare
machine/v1beta1/types_awsprovider.go
Outdated
| // +kubebuilder:validation:MaxLength=19 | ||
| // +openshift:enable:FeatureGate=AWSDedicatedHosts | ||
| // +optional | ||
| HostID *string `json:"hostID,omitempty"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the difference between setting this to "" and omitting the field entirely?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There should be no difference. I would assume this field is not set if user not intending to place instances into a dedicated host.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If there is no difference, this should not be a pointer and should have a minimum length of 1. This is probably what the linter is complaining about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this is validated by Go based webhooks, and not openapi, the linter is wrong on this one.
If we make this not a pointer, then the Go code has no way to know if this was deliberately set to "" or not. We don't want "" to be valid, so this needs to be a pointer so that we can check that.
In this case (and future cases like this in these providerspec APIs) we will want to make exceptions to the serialization rules on the linter.
We may want to even disable the serialization rules on these particular APIs somehow 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I went into standard API review mode here and forgot this API is webhook validation 🤦
Thanks for catching that!
We may want to even disable the serialization rules on these particular APIs somehow
Can we do this via codegen configurations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we do this via codegen configurations?
No, but we should be able to disable using the .golangci-lint.yaml config, ideally we could have a different config for the APIs that act like this, these MAPI ones aren't the only ones (e.g. the aggregated APIs we support too)
vr4manta
force-pushed
the
SPLAT-2206
branch
from
b088b27 to
9355a76
Compare
everettraven
left a comment
everettraven
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A couple small comments.
May have more pending the results of discussions on what the appropriate behaviors are when set to Host and AnyAvailable.
vr4manta
changed the title
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
@vr4manta: This pull request references SPLAT-2206 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 "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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. |
|
@vr4manta: This pull request references SPLAT-2206 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 "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set. In response to this:
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. |
|
@vr4manta I've gone and left a review on the PR that implements the webhook validations. Once I'm happy with the state of that PR I will tag this PR with everything it needs and then place it on hold until the MAPI PR is in a good state (beyond the validations). |
@everettraven Thanks. I hadn't finished that PR, but if all of your comments are all that is needing attention, thats a good sign. I'll have it updated and WIP removed when I am finished and ready for your final review. |
|
@vr4manta Double checking the lint job it looks like there is a compilation error related to the generated files. Could you re-generate these files to resolve that? Other than that, this looks good to go. |
Yep, i'll clean up now and re-push. |
|
@everettraven This PR is ready for your approval. Thanks! |
|
@vr4manta Are you rebased on the latest changes on the master branch? We've updated the linter to not flag the scenario that we are running into for the affinity field that should be a pointer. |
Yes I have rebased which is why there is no linting issue w/ the current string pointer that I do still have. I can rebase again if you would like. |
vr4manta
force-pushed
the
SPLAT-2206
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a1051c1 to
3550a3f
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven 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 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
Linter is failing on pointer which is incorrect in this case for the machine APIs - overriding. /override ci/prow/lint |
|
@everettraven: Overrode contexts on behalf of everettraven: ci/prow/lint In response to this:
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. |
|
/verified by @vr4manta |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
verified
|
@vr4manta: This PR has been marked as verified by In response to this:
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. |
|
@vr4manta: 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. |
4 participants
SPLAT-2206
Changes
Blocks