Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fixed detection of master during creation of multizone nodes cluster.
```release-note
Fixed detection of master during creation of multizone nodes cluster by kube-up.
```
Fixed detection of master during creation of multizone nodes cluster by kube-up.
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38609, 38227)
On kubemark master, kubelet now runs as a supervisord process and all master components as pods
This PR fixes issue #37485
On kubemark, previously we had a custom setup that runs master components as top-level processes under supervisord, which is lighter than running kubelet and docker.
This PR makes kubelet run as a process under supervisord and the master components (apiserver, controller-manager, scheduler, etcd) as pods, making testing on kubemark mimic real clusters better.
Also, start-kubemark-master.sh now closely resembles cluster/gce/gci/configure-helper.sh, allowing easy integration in future.
cc @kubernetes/sig-scalability @wojtek-t @gmarek
Automatic merge from submit-queue
hack/e2e.go / kops: Add --kops-admin-access to restrict API access
**What this PR does / why we need it**: Allow `--admin-access` to be set in `kops`
**Release note**:
```release-note
NONE
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Update to latest go-restful
Enables us to remap the variable names swagger uses in output so we can avoid duplicates across type names.
Part of #38071
@mbohlool
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38315, 38624, 38572, 38544)
Fix code coverage in build script on OS X.
Fixes#20223
- Fixes code coverage in build script on BSD systems (including OS X).
- Supersedes #38536.
Successfully tested on two platforms:
```
Darwin <hostname> 16.1.0 Darwin Kernel Version 16.1.0: Thu Oct 13 21:26:57 PDT 2016; root:xnu-3789.21.3~60/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
```
```
Linux <hostname> 4.4.14-040414-generic #201606241434 SMP Fri Jun 24 18:36:45 UTC 2016 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
```
cc @ixdy @mfanjie @balajismaniam @smarterclayton @soltysh
**Release note**:
```release-note
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38315, 38624, 38572, 38544)
scheduler: refactor main entry Run()
The kube-scheduler/app.Run() is the main entry of scheduler program.
It's enormous.
This PR tries to clean it up. Should be more modular and readable.
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 38315, 38624, 38572, 38544)
kubernetes-discovery proxy
The last commit adds an authenticating (but not authorizing) proxy to `kubernetes-discovery`. The other commits are in the submit queue already.
@sttts @cjcullen This is it. After this we can start e2e wiring.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/controller
cc @jsafrane @mikedanese @bprashanth @derekwaynecarr @thockin @saad-ali
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone **lgtms** and then someone
experienced in the project **approves**), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
## If You Care About the Process:
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
perfectly: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
## TLDR:
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the OWNERS file to add
the names of people that should be reviewing code in the future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers** section.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an approver or reviewer
of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver of the subdirectories too, so not all
OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Bad conditional in vSphereLogin function
```release-note
Fixes NotAuthenticated errors that appear in the kubelet and kube-controller-manager due to never logging in to vSphere
```
With this conditional being == instead of !=, a login would never actually be attempted by this provider, and disk attachments would fail with a NotAuthenticated error from vSphere.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: cmd/kubeadm
cc @jbeda @mikedanese @luxas @errordeveloper
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone lgtms and then someone
experienced in the project approves), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
If You Care About the Process:
------------------------------
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
well: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
Also, see https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/issues/1389.
TLDR:
-----
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the `OWNERS` file to
remove the names of people that shouldn't be reviewing code in the future in
the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers**
section. Names asre sorted by relevance, using some secret statistics.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an
approver or reviewer of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver
of the subdirectories too, so not all OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Automatic merge from submit-queue
CRI: fix ImageStatus comment
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
GRPC cannot encode `nil` (CRI-O itself panic while trying to encode `nil` for `ImageStatus`). This PR fixes `ImageStatus` comment to say that when the image does not exist the call returns a response having `Image` set to `nil` (instead of saying implementors should return `nil` directly).
/cc @mrunalp @vishh @feiskyer
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note
```
Signed-off-by: Antonio Murdaca <runcom@redhat.com>
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: cluster/vagrant
cc @derekwaynecarr
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone lgtms and then someone
experienced in the project approves), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
If You Care About the Process:
------------------------------
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
well: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
Also, see https://github.com/kubernetes/contrib/issues/1389.
TLDR:
-----
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the `OWNERS` file to
remove the names of people that shouldn't be reviewing code in the
future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify
the **approvers** section. Names asre sorted by relevance, using some
secret statistics.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an
approver or reviewer of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver
of the subdirectories too, so not all OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Automatic merge from submit-queue
cluster/aws: Clean up dhcp-options
**What this PR does / why we need it**: After adding the aws janitor, the thing we're consistently sweeping is the DhcpOptionSets created by cluster/aws/util.sh (and there were thousands on the first run). Fix it!
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*:
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note
Fix an issue where AWS tear-down leaks an DHCP Option Set.
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Bump default kubernetes version when no internet is present to v1.5
@mikedanese Please lgtm as soon as possible
It's a noop, when no internet is present so the latest version can't be determined, this version is used.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/admission/
cc @lavalamp @davidopp @erictune @liggitt @derekwaynecarr
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone lgtms and then someone
experienced in the project approves), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
If You Care About the Process:
------------------------------
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
well: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
TLDR:
-----
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. Use the following commit as a suggestion: 7f6469fc41
3. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the `OWNERS` file to
add the names of people that should be reviewing code in the future in
the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers**
section.
4. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an
approver or reviewer of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver
of the subdirectories too, so not all OWNERS files may be necessary.
5. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Leak filling for newline format on benchmark-go.sh
**What this PR does / why we need it**: make hack/benchmark-go.sh work
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #
**Special notes for your reviewer**: First commit :D , did I make a wrong modification?
**Release note**:
```release-note
```
After adding the aws janitor, the thing we're consistently sweeping is
the DhcpOptionSets created by cluster/aws/util.sh (and there were
thousands on the first run). Fix it!
Automatic merge from submit-queue
goflags must be after subcommand
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
if GOFLAGS is set when calling make, kubernetes will fail to build
as an example, I often have `GOFLAGS=-v` so I can have some idea of progress during compilation
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*:
no known issue
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note
NONE
```
gmarek