OCPNODE-2842: Set Upgradeable=False when cluster is on cgroup v1 #4822
Conversation
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2843 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2843 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2843 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
|
Related openshift/api PR: openshift/api#2181 |
sairameshv
force-pushed
the
remove_cgrpv1
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3e7f5b7 to
d34b287
Compare
sairameshv
force-pushed
the
remove_cgrpv1
branch
2 times, most recently
from
25db47f to
a2b8f7c
Compare
sairameshv
changed the title
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2276 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2276 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2276 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2276 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
|
Enhancement Proposal Ref: https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/machine-config/mco-cgroupsv2-support.md |
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2276 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
sairameshv
force-pushed
the
remove_cgrpv1
branch
2 times, most recently
from
aea470d to
0fee7e0
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
sairameshv
changed the title
|
@sairameshv: This pull request references OCPNODE-2842 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 "4.19.0" 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. |
pkg/operator/status.go
Outdated
| if configNode.Spec.CgroupMode == configv1.CgroupModeV1 { | ||
| coStatusCondition.Status = configv1.ConditionFalse | ||
| coStatusCondition.Reason = "ClusterOnCgroupV1" | ||
| coStatusCondition.Message = "Cluster is using cgroup v1 and is not upgradable. Please update the `CgroupMode` in the `nodes.config.openshift.io` object to 'v2'. Once upgraded, the cluster cannot be changed back to cgroup v1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For the message, perhaps it would be good to mention the deprecation of v1 as well, just to clarify why it's not upgradeable (does it make sense to link to anything here?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have added deprecated cgroup v1 in the message.
We already have the deprecation of cgroup v1 message in the config node object's status condition for the last few releases.
We have a reference of OCPSTRAT for this feature as of now. We don't have a concrete link to when exactly the RHCOS would be removing the support for cgroup v1 i.e. it's going to be done in the future releases (may be by 4.20?). So, I don't think we have a link at the moment to convey in the message.
CgroupMode `v1` is not supported in OCP-4.19 This change helps in preventing clusters to upgrade to 4.19 before updating the cluster to cgroupMode `v2` Signed-off-by: Sai Ramesh Vanka <[email protected]>
sairameshv
force-pushed
the
remove_cgrpv1
branch
from
0fee7e0 to
3f3df1b
Compare
|
/retest |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: sairameshv, yuqi-zhang 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
|
/retest |
Yes, definitely the errors are not related to these changes. |
| if configNode.Spec.CgroupMode == configv1.CgroupModeV1 { | ||
| coStatusCondition.Status = configv1.ConditionFalse | ||
| coStatusCondition.Reason = "ClusterOnCgroupV1" | ||
| coStatusCondition.Message = "Cluster is using deprecated cgroup v1 and is not upgradable. Please update the `CgroupMode` in the `nodes.config.openshift.io` object to 'v2'. Once upgraded, the cluster cannot be changed back to cgroup v1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This condition can be overridden by the pools. We may want to update the status and return. @yuqi-zhang ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thinking we should append coStatusCondition for cgroupv1 to any pools that are degraded and are preventing the upgrade as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, so the status here should only be overridden by the pools if a pool is degraded, which I thought was the original intent. I think fine if degraded pools took priority, and once that is fixed, the user then sees the cgroupsv1 failure. I guess if we wanted to make it that way we should do it explicitly by ordering this after the pool degrade reporting and have both conditions exit directly.
Based on your second comment, you're looking for something like: if pool degraded && cgroups on v1, then error with Reason = "ClusterOnCgroupV1AndPoolDegraded"? As far as I know the upgradeable condition is not a list of failed reason but rather a singular, but I'm happy to see that change if there's a more elegant way to do this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There can be multiple blocking CFE conditions separated with a :: delimiter. Similar to what can be found here. IMO is probably worth the modification to return a list of degraded conditions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm. This PR is modifying the status conditions... Shouldn't it be modifying the CFE conditions?
|
/retest-required |
|
/retest |
|
@sairameshv: 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. |
|
Comment aside, prow changing |
- What I did
Added code to set the cluster operator's status to
Upgradeable=Falsewhen a cluster is found to be on cgroup v1- How to verify it
Update the
CgroupModefield of ndes.config object tov1and verify that the MCO cluster operator's status has theUpgradeable=Falsecondition- Description for the changelog
Cgroupsv1 support deprecation condition/message has been added in the last release and this PR helps in updating all the clusters to cgroup v2 before upgrading to ocp 4.19
References: