-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
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.
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
Decouple VA1 network stage from control plane stage #489
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: abays 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 |
Build failed (check pipeline). Post https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/5c9ea5c7d8284ddcb63e13f31762b9ba ✔️ noop SUCCESS in 0s |
527e2fc
to
b3aef90
Compare
We need this patch also for all other unijobs, I would suggest to have it splited in different patches so we can test it separately |
b3aef90
to
81c1b68
Compare
The latest push moves the |
I wonder if these [1] https://github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/architecture/tree/main/lib/networking |
@ciecierski @arxcruz Has anyone had a chance to test this downstream at all? |
I'm +2 to merge this. Let's just confirm the jobs are green first. |
Hi @abays, I was able to test it downstream with manual run and @arxcruz too in the job. `TASK [kustomize_deploy : Apply generated content for examples/va/hci/control-plane _raw_params=oc apply -f {{ _cr }}] ***
|
Good idea to |
81c1b68
to
acb7cd0
Compare
I think @arxcruz and team would like to test downstream uni greenfield job to be sure we don't break existing job, before this change is merged. |
This likely another instance of this issue [1]. I do not think it is related to these changes, but rather due to the new install paradigm for OpenStack operator. |
We will test it, I just ask a little bit of patience since unijobs are not quickly to test, we don’t t have enough resources to test everything at once. |
Cool. There's no rush on my end. This change is solely to support what you guys are trying to do, so whatever pace works for you is good for me too. |
@jirimacku took OSPNW-908 which I guess relates to the downstream verification but better to wait for Jiri back from PTO. I have "accidentally" verified that this change is not breaking uni07eta but it was expected without any verification :-) Meanwhile created #490 to decouple uni07eta. |
acb7cd0
to
6ac61dd
Compare
I believe all |
oc -n metallb-system wait pod | ||
-l app=metallb -l component=speaker | ||
--for condition=Ready |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This doesn't really check whether the resources created in this stage are in fact ready. Unfortunately, those resources (NetConfig
, Net-Attach-Def
, L2Advertisement
and IPAddressPool
) do not have a status that can be examined. But our CI validation requires that we have at least one wait_conditions
listed here, so I've opted to use MetalLB speaker pods as the target here...but it's really just a placeholder.
So I'm now facing this error on my manual re-run of uni gamma adoption procedure. Everything is created except netconfig. Same output as in the error. Do you know what I need to change to fulfill requirements of new install paradigm for OpenStack operators? |
This removes the networking components...
NetConfig
...from the control plane stage of VA1 and gives them their own separate stage in between the NNCP stage and the control plane stage. This is needed for the UniGamma adoption job, which relies upon this VA. They want to create the NNCPs, MetalLB CRs,
NetConfig
CR and Net-attach-defs, but do NOT want to create theOpenStackControlPlane
. Now they can do so by creating an automation file with only two stages, one for NNCPs and the other for the other networking components.I have tested this in my local env and the VA deployed successfully via CIFMW.