PVC and containers share the same ResourceRequirements struct. The Claims field
in it only makes sense when used in containers. When used in a PVC, the field
should have been rejected by validation. This was overlooked when introducing
it, so now persisted objects might have it set and/or people may have started
to rely on it being accepted even when it has no effect.
Therefore we cannot reject it in validation anymore, but we can still strip
it out on create or update.
Currently, there are some unit tests that are failing on Windows due to
various reasons:
- On Windows, consecutive time.Now() calls may return the same timestamp, which would cause
the TestFreeSpaceRemoveByLeastRecentlyUsed test to flake.
- tests in kuberuntime_container_windows_test.go fail on Nodes that have fewer than 3 CPUs,
expecting the CPU max set to be more than 100% of available CPUs, which is not possible.
- calls in summary_windows_test.go are missing context.
- filterTerminatedContainerInfoAndAssembleByPodCgroupKey will filter and group container
information by the Pod cgroup key, if it exists. However, we don't have cgroups on Windows,
thus we can't make the same assertions.
This fixes the following warning (error?) in the apiserver:
E0126 18:10:38.665239 16370 fieldmanager.go:210] "[SHOULD NOT HAPPEN] failed to update managedFields" err="failed to convert new object (test/claim-84; resource.k8s.io/v1alpha1, Kind=ResourceClaim) to smd typed: .status.reservedFor: element 0: associative list without keys has an element that's a map type" VersionKind="/, Kind=" namespace="test" name="claim-84"
The root cause is the same as in e50e8a0c91:
nothing in Kubernetes outright complains about a list of items where the item
type is comparable in Go, but not a simple type. This nonetheless isn't
supposed to be done in the API and can causes problems elsewhere.
For the ReservedFor field, everything seems to work okay except for the
warning. However, it's better to follow conventions and use a map. This is
possible in this case because UID is guaranteed to be a unique key.
Validation is now stricter than before, which is a good thing: previously,
two entries with the same UID were allowed as long as some other field was
different, which wasn't a situation that should have been allowed.
PV.Spec.CSI.*SecretReference.Name should be allowed to have up to be
limited to 253 characters (DNS1123Subdomain) and not to 63 characters
(DNS1123Label), so all possible Secrets names can be used as secrets in a
PV.
This is continuation of
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/108331 / Kubernetes 1.25,
which allowed updating PVs with long secret names, if the previous PV had
long secret name too. This makes sure downgrade from 1.27 to 1.26 works well
and allows PVs created in 1.27 to be updated in 1.26.
Now the long secret names are accepted during PV creation too.
