🐛 Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods #2361

arkbriar · 2023-05-30T11:53:53Z

The change here allows user to build a fake client with graceful deleting Pods, which have their .metadata.deletionTimestamp set and have no finalizers. This is a special case allowed in the kube-apiserver.

The PR reflects the behaviour precisely according the strategy code from Kubernetes.

It should fix the #2359.

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-05-30T11:54:01Z

Welcome @arkbriar!

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 · 2023-05-30T11:54:02Z

Hi @arkbriar. 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.

vincepri · 2023-05-30T19:08:01Z

/ok-to-test
/assign @lleshchi

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-05-30T19:08:03Z

@vincepri: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: lleshchi.

Note that only kubernetes-sigs members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

/ok-to-test
/assign @lleshchi

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.

arkbriar · 2023-06-01T03:30:16Z

Hi @vincepri, thanks for unblocking the test. It seems that @lleshchi can not be assigned, could you help assign another folk who's willing to review?

Besides, can you help review the changes? @alvaroaleman Much appreciate.

pkg/client/fake/client.go

arkbriar · 2023-06-02T06:03:38Z

@arkbriar: 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
pull-controller-runtime-test 0cf3b4c link true /test pull-controller-runtime-test
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Looks like it was caused by a flaky test. Let me rerun it.

/retest

arkbriar · 2023-06-05T08:36:06Z

Hi @FillZpp, thanks for your review. I have revised the code as you suggested. Would you mind taking a another look?f

FillZpp · 2023-06-05T11:31:56Z

/lgtm
/cc @vincepri @alvaroaleman

arkbriar · 2023-06-07T12:00:00Z

/assign alvaroaleman

alvaroaleman · 2023-06-01T09:50:51Z

pkg/client/fake/client.go

+				return fmt.Errorf("refusing to create obj %s with metadata.deletionTimestamp but no finalizers", accessor.GetName())
+			}
+		} else {
+			if accessor.GetDeletionTimestamp() != nil && pointer.Int64Deref(accessor.GetDeletionGracePeriodSeconds(), 0) <= 0 {


Why would it be invalid to have DeletionGracePeriodSeconds: 0? The only check I see in the upstream code is this: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/7935006af2925dc081605c17fcb5e656cedee286/pkg/registry/core/pod/strategy.go#L187

From what I can tell it allows the value to be negative and will then set it to 0 when executing the deletion

When DeletionGracePeriodSeconds is non-zero it means the Pod can be observed because it will be deleted after that grace period. That means one can see the deleting Pod in the time range [deleted timestamp, deleted timestamp + grace period seconds).

From what I can tell it allows the value to be negative and will then set it to 0 when executing the deletion

I think it will be set to 1.

if period < 0 { period = 1 }

alvaroaleman · 2023-06-01T09:51:25Z

pkg/client/fake/client.go

+	// https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/7935006af2925dc081605c17fcb5e656cedee286/pkg/registry/core/pod/strategy.go#L163-L194
+	if gvk.Group == corev1.GroupName && gvk.Kind == "Pod" && gvk.Version == "v1" {
+		pod := obj.(*corev1.Pod)
+		// If the pod is not scheduled, it will be deleted immediately.


Please check the assertion

Sure. I think the following two assertions were copied from the upstream:

// if the pod is not scheduled, delete immediately if len(pod.Spec.NodeName) == 0 { period = 0 } // if the pod is already terminated, delete immediately if pod.Status.Phase == api.PodFailed || pod.Status.Phase == api.PodSucceeded { period = 0 }

alvaroaleman · 2023-06-11T16:59:34Z

pkg/client/fake/client.go

+			panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to get gvk for object %T: %w", obj, err))
+		}
+
+		if !allowsGracefulDelete(gvk, obj) {


So if allowsGracefulDelete is true we will never delete the object? That seems wrong.

That doesn't mean it will never delete the object but we can observe it at some certain time. The fake client can not simulate the graceful deletion now so I think it's reasonable to at least make it possible to observe such object for covering more cases within test cases.

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-07-27T03:24:26Z

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-07-27T03:24:31Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: arkbriar
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from alvaroaleman. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

arkbriar · 2023-07-27T03:25:00Z

Rebased to resolve conflicts.

Signed-off-by: arkbriar <arkbriar@gmail.com>

k8s-triage-robot · 2024-04-29T08:11:48Z

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
Close this PR with /close
Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot requested review from FillZpp and inteon May 30, 2023 11:54

k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 30, 2023

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 May 30, 2023

FillZpp reviewed Jun 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

pkg/client/fake/client.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

k8s-ci-robot requested review from alvaroaleman and vincepri June 5, 2023 11:31

k8s-ci-robot assigned FillZpp Jun 5, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 5, 2023

k8s-ci-robot assigned alvaroaleman Jun 7, 2023

alvaroaleman added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Jun 11, 2023

alvaroaleman reviewed Jun 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 26, 2023

arkbriar force-pushed the fix-2359 branch from 0cf3b4c to 3afff90 Compare July 27, 2023 03:24

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 27, 2023

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 27, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 22, 2023

arkbriar added 3 commits January 30, 2024 15:30

Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods

1c3f982

Signed-off-by: arkbriar <arkbriar@gmail.com>

Update according to comments.

7b9d22b

Signed-off-by: arkbriar <arkbriar@gmail.com>

Fix the test case

5493000

Signed-off-by: arkbriar <arkbriar@gmail.com>

arkbriar force-pushed the fix-2359 branch from 0ade309 to 5493000 Compare January 30, 2024 07:30

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 30, 2024

Use ptr to replace deprecated pkg

ce80c37

Signed-off-by: arkbriar <arkbriar@gmail.com>

k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Apr 29, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

🐛 Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods #2361

🐛 Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods #2361

arkbriar commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

vincepri commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 1, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 2, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 5, 2023

FillZpp commented Jun 5, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 7, 2023

alvaroaleman Jun 1, 2023

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

alvaroaleman Jun 1, 2023

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

alvaroaleman Jun 11, 2023

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 27, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 27, 2023

arkbriar commented Jul 27, 2023

k8s-triage-robot commented Apr 29, 2024

🐛 Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods #2361

Are you sure you want to change the base?

🐛 Allow building a fake client with graceful deleting Pods #2361

Conversation

arkbriar commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

vincepri commented May 30, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 30, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 1, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 2, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 5, 2023

FillZpp commented Jun 5, 2023

arkbriar commented Jun 7, 2023

alvaroaleman Jun 1, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alvaroaleman Jun 1, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alvaroaleman Jun 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

arkbriar Jul 27, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 27, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 27, 2023

arkbriar commented Jul 27, 2023

k8s-triage-robot commented Apr 29, 2024