Automatic merge from submit-queue
Better waiting for watch event delivery in cacher
@lavalamp - I think we should do something simple for now (and merge for 1.5), and do something a bit more sophisticated right after 1.5, WDYT?
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fix concurrent read/write to map error in kubelet
Fix#37560.
The concurrent read/write is to the pod annotations. The call in apiserver.go reads the annotations, and the config.go writes the annotations. I moved the reads to config.go to avoid the race.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
add wrapper to provide stderr on command errors
The go standard library doesn't include stderr in the error message, but in many cases it is present: https://golang.org/src/os/exec/exec.go#L389 . This adds a wrapper to display that information. I've added in it on spot where the kops test is having trouble. If it works well, we can add it elsewhere.
@wojtek-t ptal
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fixing the logic to select first cluster in federated ingress controller
Ref https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/36074.
Before this change, ingress controller was using cluster with clusterIndex = 0 as the first cluster to create the ingress in.
But the ordering of clusters can change and hence ingress controller ended up creating the ingress in multiple clusters.
This PR fixes it by using an annotation on federated ingress. Controller now picks up a cluster randomly as the first cluster and creates ingress there. This clusters name is stored as an annotation on the federated ingress. Contoller does not create an ingress in any other cluster if this annotation is set on the federated ingress and IP has not been propagated. Once IP has been propagated, controller creates the ingress in all clusters.
cc @kubernetes/sig-cluster-federation @madhusudancs
Automatic merge from submit-queue
fix: elasticsearch template mapping to parse kubernetes.labels
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
This PR updates the field mappings for the elasticsearch template that ships with the EFK stack implementation.
Specifically, elasticsearch cannot parse the `kubernetes.labels` object because it attempts to treat it as a string and produces an error. This update treats `kubernetes.labels` as an object and all of the properties within as a string, allowing accurate indexing and allowing users in kibana to search on `kubernetes.labels.*`.
**Release note**:
```release-note
Fluentd/Elastisearch add-on: correctly parse and index kubernetes labels
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Node E2E: Fix remote node e2e focus.
Before, we use `'focus'` and `'skip'` in `hack/make-rules/test-e2e-node.sh`.
When we run `make test-e2e-node REMOTE=true FOCUS="Some Thing"`, it will eventually be translated to `-focus='Some Thing'` [here](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/test/e2e_node/remote/remote.go#L284-L285).
However, golang `exec.Command` wraps each argument with single quote, the argument will become `'xx -focus='Some Thing' xx'`, and cause error because of the 2 layer single quote.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fix salt master check using hard coded string
<!-- Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, read our contributor guidelines https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and developer guide https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/development.md
2. If you want *faster* PR reviews, read how: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/faster_reviews.md
3. Follow the instructions for writing a release note: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/pull-requests.md#release-notes
-->
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
**Which issue this PR fixes**
This is for vsphere only.
If var $INSTANCE_PREFIX is changed in cluster/vsphere/config-default.sh, then salt master check will fail due to the hard coded string "kubernetes-master". The fix uses $MASTER_NAME instead.
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
<!-- Steps to write your release note:
1. Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state (if you have access)
2. Enter your extended release note in the below block; leaving it blank means using the PR title as the release note. If no release note is required, just write `NONE`.
-->
```release-note
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Improved validation error message when env.valueFrom contains no (or …
<!-- Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, read our contributor guidelines https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and developer guide https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/development.md
2. If you want *faster* PR reviews, read how: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/faster_reviews.md
3. Follow the instructions for writing a release note: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/pull-requests.md#release-notes
-->
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
A misleading error message is shown if the user mistypes (or forgets to specify) a field under env.valueFrom. This is the error message: "may not have more than one field specified at a time". But there is only one (misspelled) field specified.
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes #
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
<!-- Steps to write your release note:
1. Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state (if you have access)
2. Enter your extended release note in the below block; leaving it blank means using the PR title as the release note. If no release note is required, just write `NONE`.
-->
```
Improved error message for missing/misspelled field under env.valueFrom
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Mention overflows when mistakenly call function FromInt
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
When mistakenly call this method with a value that overflows int32 will causes strange behavior in some environment (maybe in amd64 system, i'm not sure but my test shows that).
For example, call FromInt(93333333333) would result in -1155947179 and not mention overflows.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
skip test docker if we do not use docker as container runtime.
skip test docker if we do not use docker as container runtime.
Signed-off-by: Xianglin Gao <xlgao@zju.edu.cn>
Automatic merge from submit-queue
federation service e2e: Creating configmap for kube-dns
Ref #37105 and #37143.
Creating kube-dns config map to pass federations flag to kube-dns.
This is required since we moved to the new add on manager. With the old add on manager, we were using kube-dns rc that included the federations flag.
cc @kubernetes/sig-cluster-federation @madhusudancs @bowei @MrHohn
Verified that the tests pass with this change.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Removes shorthand flag -w from kubectl apply
Fixes#37342.
A shorthand flag `-w` was introduced as flag `--prune-whitelist` for kubectl apply two weeks ago. Turned out it is not what we should do. Removing this shorthand flag before 1.5 release to prevent further issues.
@ymqytw @pwittrock
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Update kubeadm etcd to 3.0.13 in order to switch to the etcd3 storage format
ref: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/35723
I think we should switch as soon as possible, but run it in etcd2 mode until the full etcd3 mode is stable
@kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle @wojtek-t @xiang90 @lavalamp
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Update kubectl drain help message
Update `kubectl drain` help messages according to kubernetes/kubernetes.github.io#1768
cc: @erictune @pwittrock
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Add missing variable to openstack provider
`FIXED_NETWORK_CIDR` environment variable is mandatory by
openstack-heat kubernetes provider, but it's missing as
default value. Adding this environment variable is helpful
to build kubernetes cluster using openstack-heat provider.
So this patch adds it.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
eliminate kuberentes
Luckily only caught one from echo!
@kubernetes/test-infra-maintainers
<!-- Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, read our contributor guidelines https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md and developer guide https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/development.md
2. If you want *faster* PR reviews, read how: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/faster_reviews.md
3. Follow the instructions for writing a release note: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/pull-requests.md#release-notes
-->
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
It's important, and really hard, to identify kuberentes from kubernetes. As a human being, one's brain tends to auto fix the spelling for you thus when a dev was staring at the log for a good 30-min or so he will start question about his life and belief.
Luckily this is the only place in k/k, it's super important to fix it to avoid future pain.
**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**:
<!-- Steps to write your release note:
1. Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state (if you have access)
2. Enter your extended release note in the below block; leaving it blank means using the PR title as the release note. If no release note is required, just write `NONE`.
-->
```release-note
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Clean up some wording
The wording felt a little clunky so I tried to smooth it out a little. Hopefully I maintained the author's intent.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/apis
cc @lavalamp @smarterclayton @erictune @thockin @bgrant0607
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
Curating Owners: pkg/api
cc @lavalamp @smarterclayton @erictune @thockin @bgrant0607
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
Added comments on running update-bazel.sh in "$GOPATH/src/k8s.io/kubernetes"
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
This path made `hack/update-bazel.sh` to accept `$GOPATH` with multiple path.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fix container to pod in resource-qos.md
`...then the container is classified as Guaranteed.`
Here `container` should be `pod`.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: build-tools/kube-dns
cc @thockin @artfulcoder
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
Curating Owners: pkg/proxy
cc @thockin
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
update gazel usage in bazel.md
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
Now run the newest gazel have to specify the '-root' argument to update a single BUILD file.
So updated the gazel usage.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fix doc links in Federation readme
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
The user guide and admin guide links were swapped round
**Release note**: NONE
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Reduce verbosity of volume reconciler
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
It reduces the log verbosity for attaching of volumes
**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
Reduce verbosity of volume reconciler when attaching volumes
```
Set logging level for information about attaching of volumes to from 1 to 4
Otherwise the log is spammed with one line per 100ms while attaching is
in progress and afterwards as long as the volume is attached.
Kubernetes Submit Queue