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
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 kubectl drain help message
Update `kubectl drain` help messages according to kubernetes/kubernetes.github.io#1768
cc: @erictune @pwittrock
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
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
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.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
kubelet: eviction: add memcg threshold notifier to improve eviction responsiveness
This PR adds the ability for the eviction code to get immediate notification from the kernel when the available memory in the root cgroup falls below a user defined threshold, controlled by setting the `memory.available` siginal with the `--eviction-hard` flag.
This PR by itself, doesn't change anything as the frequency at which new stats can be obtained is currently controlled by the cadvisor housekeeping interval. That being the case, the call to `synchronize()` by the notification loop will very likely get stale stats and not act any more quickly than it does now.
However, whenever cadvisor does get on-demand stat gathering ability, this will improve eviction responsiveness by getting async notification of the root cgroup memory state rather than relying on polling cadvisor.
@vishh @derekwaynecarr @kubernetes/rh-cluster-infra
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Change stickyMaxAge from seconds to minutes, fixes issue #35677
**What this PR does / why we need it**: Increases the service sessionAfinity time from 180 seconds to 180 minutes for proxy mode iptables which was a bug introduced in a refactor.
**Which issue this PR fixes**: fixes#35677
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
**Release note**:
``` release-note
Fixed wrong service sessionAffinity stickiness time from 180 sec to 180 minutes in proxy mode iptables.
```
Since there is no test for the sessionAffinity feature at the moment I wanted to create one but I don't know how.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Add more logging around Pod deletion
After this PR we'll have at least V(2) level log near all Pod deletions.
@saad-ali - this is required by GKE to help with diagnosing possible problem.
cc @dchen1107 @wojtek-t
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Read all resources for finalization and gc, not just preferred
Fixes#31481.
Currently when starting namespace controller or garbage collector we only gather preferred version resources, which in case of multiple versions (you guessed it `batch/v2alpha1.CronJobs` again) isn't sufficient. This PR adds additional method which actually retrieves all resources from all versions and works on them.
@kubernetes/sig-api-machinery ptal
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Revert "Use Gid when provisioning Gluster Volumes."
On further inspection the design in #35460 was not secure enough. This PR reverts the change.
This reverts commit 7a0d219d12.
