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.

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

NO-ISSUE: Fix auto VIPs allocation on local Nutanix flow #2423

Conversation

eliorerz
Copy link
Contributor

This changes will only take place when running nutanix test locally - because that vip_dhcp_allocation is always set to false in nutanix CI.

/cc @adriengentil @danmanor

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label May 15, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@eliorerz: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue.

In response to this:

This changes will only take place when running nutanix test locally - because that vip_dhcp_allocation is always set to false in nutanix CI.

/cc @adriengentil @danmanor

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.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 15, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 15, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: eliorerz

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 May 15, 2024
@@ -66,6 +66,10 @@ def get_ingress_and_api_vips(self):
"ingress_vips": self._entity_config.ingress_vips,
}

elif self._entity_config.vip_dhcp_allocation is True:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
elif self._entity_config.vip_dhcp_allocation is True:
else:

should be enough?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nope, we need to differ True, from False from None.
else in this case will include the None case

Copy link
Contributor

@adriengentil adriengentil May 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can we add some doc at the beginning of the function to describe the 3 cases? I think it would help to understand what we try to achieve

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can elaborate more if needed

Copy link
Contributor

@adriengentil adriengentil May 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, it's just because I find this structure a bit misleading to read:

def f(my_bool):
  if my_bool==true:
    return
  if my_bool==false
    return
  
  ... more code here because my_bool is none...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@adriengentil I added a function documentation, LMK if that is OK

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

perfect, thanks! Just a typo.

@eliorerz eliorerz force-pushed the NO-ISSUE-Fix-auto-VIPs-allocation-on-Nutanix-flow branch from 08f2da3 to 907d6b1 Compare May 28, 2024 08:51
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 28, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented May 28, 2024

@eliorerz: 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/e2e-metal-assisted-ipv4v6 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-ipv4v6
ci/prow/e2e-metal-single-node-live-iso 907d6b1 link true /test e2e-metal-single-node-live-iso
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-static-ip-suite 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-static-ip-suite
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-ipv6 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-ipv6
ci/prow/images 907d6b1 link true /test images
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-kube-api-net-suite 907d6b1 link true /test e2e-metal-assisted-kube-api-net-suite
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-bond 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-bond
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted 907d6b1 link true /test e2e-metal-assisted
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-none 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-none
ci/prow/e2e-metal-assisted-kube-api-late-binding-single-node 907d6b1 link false /test e2e-metal-assisted-kube-api-late-binding-single-node

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.

2) vip_dhcp_allocation is set to True: No need to provide API and Ingress VIP, return None.
3) vip_dhcp_allocation is not being set at all and its value is equal to None: In this case, search free IPs
and set them as VIPs. The behavior is the same as vip_dhcp_allocation = False but getting the IPs first.
Note that (3) is supposed to happen only locally due to the face that vip_dhcp_allocation is set in CI to some
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
Note that (3) is supposed to happen only locally due to the face that vip_dhcp_allocation is set in CI to some
Note that (3) is supposed to happen only locally due to the fact that vip_dhcp_allocation is set in CI to some

@openshift-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 29, 2024
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 29, 2024
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link

PR needs rebase.

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.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Sep 28, 2024
@openshift-bot
Copy link

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.

Reopen the issue by commenting /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Exclude this issue from closing again by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

/close

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot closed this Oct 29, 2024
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 29, 2024

@openshift-bot: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.

Reopen the issue by commenting /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Exclude this issue from closing again by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

/close

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants