Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

kubeadm: set priority class name to system-cluster-critical for all master components #73857

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2019
Merged

kubeadm: set priority class name to system-cluster-critical for all master components #73857

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 12, 2019

Conversation

ereslibre
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?
/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:
Remove the deprecated scheduler.alpha.kubernetes.io/critical-pod pod annotation and use
the priorityClassName first class attribute instead, setting all master components to
system-cluster-critical.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes kubernetes/kubeadm#1291

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

kubeadm: all master components are now exclusively relying on the `PriorityClassName` pod spec for annotating them as cluster critical components. Since `scheduler.alpha.kubernetes.io/critical-pod` annotation is no longer supported by Kubernetes 1.14 this annotation is no longer added to master components.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. area/kubeadm sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 8, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from dixudx and kad February 8, 2019 17:33
@ereslibre
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @timothysc @fabriziopandini @neolit123

neolit123
neolit123 reviewed Feb 8, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks @ereslibre
LGTM

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

/remove-kind api-change
/priority important-longterm
/kind cleanup

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. and removed kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 8, 2019
timothysc
timothysc suggested changes Feb 8, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@timothysc timothysc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think just adding some tests to verify, but otherwise it's looking good.

@ereslibre
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think just adding some tests to verify, but otherwise it's looking good.

I would say all changes are covered in the current tests, are you missing other specific tests?

@timothysc
Copy link
Member

If someone were to muck the field on a different PR we should verify that it's always set.

@seh
Copy link
Contributor

seh commented Feb 8, 2019

Does this address kubernetes/kubeadm#1337 (CoreDNS)? It looks like you covered kube-proxy, but not the DNS servers.

@ereslibre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Does this address kubernetes/kubeadm#1337 (CoreDNS)? It looks like you covered kube-proxy, but not the DNS servers.

You are right, I will update the PR. Thank you!

@ereslibre
Copy link
Contributor Author

All feedback addressed, PTAL when you can, thanks! cc/ @timothysc

fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini approved these changes Feb 11, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @ereslibre
/approve

cmd/kubeadm/app/phases/addons/dns/manifests.go Outdated
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ spec:
labels:
k8s-app: kube-dns
spec:
priorityClassName: system-cluster-critical
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

setting priority for CoreDNS partially overlaps with #73649...
but I don't know if it makes sense to reconcile these two trains at this stage...

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 11, 2019
@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 12, 2019
@ereslibre
kubeadm: set priority class name to system-cluster-critical for all…
30dc43f 
… master components

Remove the deprecated `scheduler.alpha.kubernetes.io/critical-pod` pod annotation and use
the `priorityClassName` first class attribute instead, setting all master components to
`system-cluster-critical`.
fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini approved these changes Feb 12, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks @ereslibre !
/approve
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 12, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ereslibre, fabriziopandini

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 merged commit d81daec into kubernetes:master Feb 12, 2019
@ereslibre ereslibre deleted the set-priority-class-name branch February 12, 2019 20:40
@chrisohaver chrisohaver mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2019
Merged
@joshbranham joshbranham mentioned this pull request Sep 11, 2019
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@neolit123 neolit123 neolit123 left review comments

@timothysc timothysc timothysc requested changes

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini fabriziopandini approved these changes

@dixudx dixudx Awaiting requested review from dixudx

@kad kad Awaiting requested review from kad

Assignees

@timothysc timothysc

@neolit123 neolit123

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/kubeadm cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. 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. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RFE: Audit default limits and priorities
6 participants
@ereslibre @neolit123 @timothysc @seh @fabriziopandini @k8s-ci-robot