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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

api: extend validation of dynamic resource allocation fields in PodSpec #116576

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 14, 2023
Merged

api: extend validation of dynamic resource allocation fields in PodSpec #116576

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 14, 2023
+97 −38

Conversation

pohly
Copy link
Contributor

@pohly pohly commented Mar 14, 2023

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup
/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:

The generated ResourceClaim name and the names of the ResourceClaimTemplate and ResourceClaim referenced by a pod must be valid according to the resource API, otherwise the pod cannot start.

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checking this was removed from the original implementation out of concerns about validating fields in core against limitations imposed by a separate, alpha API. But as this was pointed out again in
#116254 (comment) it gets added back.

The same strings that worked before still work now. In particular, the constraints for a spec.resourceClaim.name are still the same (DNS label).

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

api: validation of a PodSpec now rejects invalid ResourceClaim and ResourceClaimTemplate names. For a pod, the name generated for the ResourceClaim when using a template also must be valid.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/3063

@pohly
api: extend validation of dynamic resource allocation fields in PodSpec
e97531b 
The generated ResourceClaim name and the names of the ResourceClaimTemplate and
ResourceClaim referenced by a pod must be valid according to the resource API,
otherwise the pod cannot start.

Checking this was removed from the original implementation out of concerns
about validating fields in core against limitations imposed by a separate,
alpha API.  But as this was pointed out again in
kubernetes#116254 (comment)
it gets added back.

The same strings that worked before still work now. In particular, the
constraints for a spec.resourceClaim.name are still the same (DNS label).
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 14, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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 needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 14, 2023
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

@pohly
Copy link
Contributor Author

pohly commented Mar 14, 2023

/retest

klueska
klueska reviewed Mar 14, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@klueska klueska left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one small comment

pkg/apis/core/validation/validation.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@pohly pohly mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2023
Open
34 tasks
@klueska
Copy link
Contributor

klueska commented Mar 14, 2023

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 14, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 4dd1420ab82e17fbf93d6ae4d94e7ca003e53d48

@pohly
Copy link
Contributor Author

pohly commented Mar 14, 2023

/assign @thockin

Not crucial for 1.27, but perhaps look at it if you run out of other PRs.

thockin
thockin reviewed Mar 14, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@thockin thockin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: pohly, thockin

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 Mar 14, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit f315a46 into kubernetes:master Mar 14, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.27 milestone Mar 14, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@klueska klueska klueska left review comments

@thockin thockin thockin left review comments

@dims dims Awaiting requested review from dims

Assignees

@klueska klueska

@thockin thockin

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. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.27
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@pohly @k8s-ci-robot @k8s-triage-robot @klueska @thockin