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

⚠️ admission responses with raw Status #1129

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Aug 27, 2020
Merged

⚠️ admission responses with raw Status #1129

merged 7 commits into from Aug 27, 2020

Conversation

ericabramov
Copy link

If a custom webhook validator returns a metav1.Status object as the error, the validation handler will build an admission response with this Status object as is, instead of building a new Status object based on err.Error()

This might be considered as a breaking change since the behaviour of the
validation handler is going to be slightly different from what the users
might expect based on the previous version of the code

If a custom webhook validator returns a metav1.Status object as the error, the validation handler will build an admission response with this Status object as is, instead of building a new Status object based on err.Error()

This might be considered as a breaking change since the behaviour of the
validation handler is going to be slightly different from what the users
might expect based on the previous version of the code
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please follow instructions at https://git.k8s.io/community/CLA.md#the-contributor-license-agreement to sign the CLA.

It may take a couple minutes for the CLA signature to be fully registered; after that, please reply here with a new comment and we'll verify. Thanks.


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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 18, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @Shpectator!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Shpectator. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 18, 2020
@@ -80,6 +80,17 @@ func ValidationResponse(allowed bool, reason string) Response {
return resp
}

// ValidationResponseFromStatus returns a response for admitting a request with provided Status object.
func ValidationResponseFromStatus(allowed bool, status *metav1.Status) Response {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't know that this needs to be a public helper method at the moment, especially since it's basically just constructing an object from the listed fields.

return Denied(err.Error())
}
}

return Allowed("")
}

func isStatusError(err *error) (bool, *metav1.Status) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this method is a bit weirdly named -- I'd just expect it to return a bool.

The entire thing should be replacable with errors.As (see above)

Comment on lines 75 to 77
isStatusError, status := isStatusError(&err)
if isStatusError {
return ValidationResponseFromStatus(false, status)
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
isStatusError, status := isStatusError(&err)
if isStatusError {
return ValidationResponseFromStatus(false, status)
var statusError errors.StatusError
if goerrors.As(&statusError) {
return ...
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(the other nice thing about this is that if the status error is wrapped in such a way that it's intended to be unwrapped, we'll still pull the status)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is there any corresponding interface for status-returning errors in the k8s api errors package that we should be asserting on? (basically, is there a pattern for "my custom error returns status information)

@DirectXMan12 DirectXMan12 self-assigned this Aug 18, 2020
@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 18, 2020
@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

/retest

@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

I signed it

@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

ping cla bot

@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

I signed it

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Aug 19, 2020
Eric Abramov added 2 commits August 19, 2020 12:27
If a custom webhook validator returns a metav1.Status object as the error, the validation handler will build an admission response with this Status object as is, instead of building a new Status object based on err.Error()

This might be considered as a breaking change since the behaviour of the
validation handler is going to be slightly different from what the users
might expect based on the previous version of the code
If a custom webhook validator returns a metav1.Status object as the error, the validation handler will build an admission response with this Status object as is, instead of building a new Status object based on err.Error()

This might be considered as a breaking change since the behaviour of the
validation handler is going to be slightly different from what the users
might expect based on the previous version of the code
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 19, 2020
@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

/assign @DirectXMan12

@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

ericabramov commented Aug 19, 2020

@DirectXMan12 I've addressed all your comments

@ericabramov
Copy link
Author

/retest

@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

looks good, just need tests :-)

@DirectXMan12 DirectXMan12 modified the milestone: v0.6.x Aug 20, 2020
@DirectXMan12 DirectXMan12 added this to the v0.7.x milestone Aug 20, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 24, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@DirectXMan12 DirectXMan12 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

couple of comments inline. I can handle these changes if need-be, just let me know

pkg/webhook/admission/validator_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/webhook/admission/validator_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/webhook/admission/validator_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/webhook/admission/validator_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 26, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: DirectXMan12, Shpectator

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 26, 2020
@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

awesome, looks great now

@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

o_O I'll file a bug about this flake.

/retest for the moment

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@DirectXMan12: The /retest command does not accept any targets.
The following commands are available to trigger jobs:

  • /test pull-controller-runtime-test-master
  • /test pull-controller-runtime-apidiff-master

Use /test all to run all jobs.

In response to this:

o_O I'll file a bug about this flake.

/retest for the moment

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/test-infra repository.

@DirectXMan12
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit be59d64 into kubernetes-sigs:master Aug 27, 2020
@ericabramov ericabramov deleted the admission-webhooks-status-response branch August 27, 2020 10:32
@ericabramov ericabramov restored the admission-webhooks-status-response branch September 9, 2020 16:42
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. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants