Automatic merge from submit-queue
Minor cleanups
Minor improvements:
- `ValidateNoNewFinalizers`: remove unused const
- Mention that mutation of `spec.initContainers[*].image` field is allowed
- Improve godoc comments
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Improvements to mustrunas_test.go
refs #41990
Signed-off-by: Julien Pivotto <roidelapluie@inuits.eu>
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
**Which issue this PR fixes** *(optional, in `fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)` format, will close that issue when PR gets merged)*: fixes#41990
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
```release-note
```
- ValidateNoNewFinalizers: remove unused const
- Mention that mutation of spec.initContainers[*].image field is allowed
- Improve godoc comments
- validation_test.go(expectPrefix): remove unused function
- Add a new type PortworxVolumeSource
- Implement the kubernetes volume plugin for Portworx Volumes under pkg/volume/portworx
- The Portworx Volume Driver uses the libopenstorage/openstorage specifications and apis for volume operations.
Changes for k8s configuration and examples for portworx volumes.
- Add PortworxVolume hooks in kubectl, kube-controller-manager and validation.
- Add a README for PortworxVolume usage as PVs, PVCs and StorageClass.
- Add example spec files
Handle code review comments.
- Modified READMEs to incorporate to suggestions.
- Add a test for ReadWriteMany access mode.
- Use util.UnmountPath in TearDown.
- Add ReadOnly flag to PortworxVolumeSource
- Use hostname:port instead of unix sockets
- Delete the mount dir in TearDown.
- Fix link issue in persistentvolumes README
- In unit test check for mountpath after Setup is done.
- Add PVC Claim Name as a Portworx Volume Label
Generated code and documentation.
- Updated swagger spec
- Updated api-reference docs
- Updated generated code under pkg/api/v1
Godeps update for Portworx Volume Driver
- Adds github.com/libopenstorage/openstorage
- Adds go.pedge.io/pb/go/google/protobuf
- Updates Godep Licenses
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Add PSP support for seccomp profiles
Seccomp support for PSP. There are still a couple of TODOs that need to be fixed but this is passing tests.
One thing of note, since seccomp is all being stored in annotations right now it breaks some of the assumptions we've stated for the provider in terms of mutating the passed in pod. I've put big warning comments around the pieces that do that to make sure it's clear and covered the rollback in admission if the policy fails to validate.
@sttts @pmorie @erictune @smarterclayton @liggitt
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Add seccomp and apparmor support.
This PR adds seccomp and apparmor support in new CRI.
This a WIP because I'm still adding unit test for some of the functions. Sent this PR here for design discussion.
This PR is similar with https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/33450.
The differences are:
* This PR passes seccomp and apparmor configuration via annotations;
* This PR keeps the seccomp handling logic in docker shim because current seccomp implementation is very docker specific, and @timstclair told me that even the json seccomp profile file is defined by docker.
Notice that this PR almost passes related annotations in `api.Pod` to the runtime directly instead of introducing new CRI annotation.
@yujuhong @feiskyer @timstclair
Automatic merge from submit-queue
[AppArmor] Promote AppArmor annotations to beta
Justification for promoting AppArmor to beta:
1. We will provide an upgrade path to GA
2. We don't anticipate any major changes to the design, and will continue to invest in this feature
3. We will thoroughly test it. If any serious issues are uncovered we can reevaluate, and we're committed to fixing them.
4. We plan to provide beta-level support for the feature anyway (responding quickly to issues).
Note that this does not include the yet-to-be-merged status annotation (https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/31382). I'd like to propose keeping that one alpha for now because I'm not sure the PodStatus is the right long-term home for it (I think a separate monitoring channel, e.g. cAdvisor, would be a better solution).
/cc @thockin @matchstick @erictune
Jamie Hannaford
