When defining a ClusterIP Service, we can specify externalIP, and the
traffic policy of externalIP is subject to externalTrafficPolicy.
However, the policy can't be set when type is not NodePort or
LoadBalancer, and will default to Cluster when kube-proxy processes the
Service.
This commit updates the defaulting and validation of Service to allow
specifying ExternalTrafficPolicy for ClusterIP Services with
ExternalIPs.
Signed-off-by: Quan Tian <qtian@vmware.com>
PVC and containers shared the same ResourceRequirements struct to define their
API. When resource claims were added, that struct got extended, which
accidentally also changed the PVC API. To avoid such a mistake from happening
again, PVC now uses its own VolumeResourceRequirements struct.
The `Claims` field gets removed because risk of breaking someone is low:
theoretically, YAML files which have a claims field for volumes now
get rejected when validating against the OpenAPI. Such files
have never made sense and should be fixed.
Code that uses the struct definitions needs to be updated.
The fact that the .status.loadBalancer field can be set while .spec.type
is not "LoadBalancer" is a flub. Any spec update will already clear
.status.ingress, so it's hard to really rely on this. After this
change, updates which try to set this combination will fail validation.
Existing cases of this will not be broken. Any spec/metadata update
will clear it (no error) and this is the only stanza of status.
New gate "AllowServiceLBStatusOnNonLB" is off by default, but can be
enabled if this change actually breaks someone, which seems exceeedingly
unlikely.
Generating the name avoids all potential name collisions. It's not clear how
much of a problem that was because users can avoid them and the deterministic
names for generic ephemeral volumes have not led to reports from users. But
using generated names is not too hard either.
What makes it relatively easy is that the new pod.status.resourceClaimStatus
map stores the generated name for kubelet and node authorizer, i.e. the
information in the pod is sufficient to determine the name of the
ResourceClaim.
The resource claim controller becomes a bit more complex and now needs
permission to modify the pod status. The new failure scenario of "ResourceClaim
created, updating pod status fails" is handled with the help of a new special
"resource.kubernetes.io/pod-claim-name" annotation that together with the owner
reference identifies exactly for what a ResourceClaim was generated, so
updating the pod status can be retried for existing ResourceClaims.
The transition from deterministic names is handled with a special case for that
recovery code path: a ResourceClaim with no annotation and a name that follows
the Kubernetes <= 1.27 naming pattern is assumed to be generated for that pod
claim and gets added to the pod status.
There's no immediate need for it, but just in case that it may become relevant,
the name of the generated ResourceClaim may also be left unset to record that
no claim was needed. Components processing such a pod can skip whatever they
normally would do for the claim. To ensure that they do and also cover other
cases properly ("no known field is set", "must check ownership"),
resourceclaim.Name gets extended.
- Add SidecarContaienrs feature gate
- Add ContainerRestartPolicy type
- Add RestartPolicy field to the Container
- Drop RestartPolicy field if the feature is disabled
- Add validation for the SidecarContainers
- Allow restartable init containaers to have a startup probe
The second phase of user namespaces support was related to supporting
only stateless pods. Since the changes were accepted for the KEP, now
the scope is extended to support stateful pods as well. Remove the
check that blocks creating PODs with volumes when using user namespaces.
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Scrivano <gscrivan@redhat.com>
Since the feature is GA and locked to true, tests can no longer set it
to false. Cleaning up by removing all references to this feature gate
from tests.
Feature gate will be removed in v1.29.
This was making my eyes bleed as I read over code.
I used the following in vim. I made them up on the fly, but they seemed
to pass manual inspection.
:g/},\n\s*{$/s//}, {/
:w
:g/{$\n\s*{$/s//{{/
:w
:g/^\(\s*\)},\n\1},$/s//}},/
:w
:g/^\(\s*\)},$\n\1}$/s//}}/
:w
This touches cases where FromInt() is used on numeric constants, or
values which are already int32s, or int variables which are defined
close by and can be changed to int32s with little impact.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Kitt <skitt@redhat.com>
The generated ResourceClaim name and the names of the ResourceClaimTemplate and
ResourceClaim referenced by a pod must be valid according to the resource API,
otherwise the pod cannot start.
Checking this was removed from the original implementation out of concerns
about validating fields in core against limitations imposed by a separate,
alpha API. But as this was pointed out again in
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/116254#discussion_r1134010324
it gets added back.
The same strings that worked before still work now. In particular, the
constraints for a spec.resourceClaim.name are still the same (DNS label).
1. Define ContainerResizePolicy and add it to Container struct.
2. Add ResourcesAllocated and Resources fields to ContainerStatus struct.
3. Define ResourcesResizeStatus and add it to PodStatus struct.
4. Add InPlacePodVerticalScaling feature gate and drop disabled fields.
5. ResizePolicy validation & defaulting and Resources mutability for CPU/Memory.
6. Various fixes from code review feedback (originally committed on Apr 12, 2022)
KEP: /enhancements/keps/sig-node/1287-in-place-update-pod-resources
