jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
<!-- Please use this template while reporting a bug and provide as much info as possible. Not doing so may result in your bug not being addressed in a timely manner. Thanks! If the matter is security related, please disclose it privately via --What happened: Attempting to add a finalizer to a custom resource using a strategic merge patch fails: kubectl sends the request with a media type () that the server rejects: What you expected to happen: kubectl sends the patch with a media type that the server accepts. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Apply the example custom resource definition from the sample controller project: Create a sample custom resource: Attempt to patch the CR: Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"20", GitVersion:"v1.20.1", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2020-12-18T12:09:25Z", GoVersion:"go1.15.5", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"} Server Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"20", GitVersion:"v1.20.1", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2020-12-18T12:00:47Z", GoVersion:"go1.15.5", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"} Cloud provider or hardware configuration: libvirt virtual machine OS (e.g: ): NAME="Ubuntu" VERSION="20.04.1 LTS (Focal Fossa)" ID=ubuntu IDLIKE=debian PRETTYNAME="Ubuntu 20.04.1 LTS" VERSIONID="20.04" HOMEURL="" SUPPORTURL="" BUGREPORTURL="" PRIVACYPOLICYURL="" VERSIONCODENAME=focal UBUNTUCODENAME=focal Kernel (e.g. ): Linux egw 5.4.0-56-generic -Ubuntu SMP Mon Nov 23 19:20:19 UTC 2020 x8664 x8664 x8664 GNU/Linux Install tools: kubeadm Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others:
/sig cli
/assign Will look into this. You can refer to and the quota above. "strategic merge patch format is not supported" for custom resource.
The error message is not that clear.
When you run it with , it suggests to use --type=merge and it works. uses uses
This seems to work as expected. Do you think we need to make the server response more friendly as the message of .
Thank you, Paco, for looking into this! The problem is that merge patch is unable to do some important operations (for example, safely removing a finalizer from an object's metadata) so it's not a substitute for strategic merge. The error message suggesting that the client switch to merge patch is unhelpful, but a clear message indicating that strategic merge patch is unsupported would be helpful, and documentation that strategic merge patch is unsupported for Custom Resource objects would also be helpful. For most use cases the proper workaround is update with retry, not merge patch. Thank you!
/unassign
this is a topic for sig api machinery. /sig api-machinery
/cc /triage accepted
Do you think we need to make the server response more friendly as the message of kubectl client --dry-run=client. Apologies for the really late response on this. I've created to improve the message. /assign
TestUpdateAllocatedResourcesStatus Few days ago No response No response /sig node
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the label and provide further guidance. The label can be by org members by writing in a comment. <detailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
/assign
I could reproduce this with in maybe 1/10 times.
cc I am unfamilar with this code so wanted to see if you have any ideas on this.
yes, I'll have a look ASAP
In the flake, the ResourceHealth array is with a different order. If this is acceptable, we should tune the test.
nice catch ! I think the best fix is ensure the ordering of statuses either in the production code or in the test code before to check Note: if we do this in the production code then we should go full throttle and offer a full API guarantee (docs, explicit tests) because users will depend on this
A quick fix is like if we want to ignore the order.
<!-- Thanks for filing an issue! Before hitting the button, please answer these questions.--Is this a request for help? (If yes, you should use our troubleshooting guide and community support channels, see ): What keywords did you search in Kubernetes issues before filing this one? (If you have found any duplicates, you should instead reply there.): Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST? (choose one): BUG REPORT <!-- If this is a BUG REPORT, please: Fill in as much of the template below as you can. If you leave out information, we can't help you as well. If this is a FEATURE REQUEST, please: Describe in detail the feature/behavior/change you'd like to see. In both cases, be ready for followup questions, and please respond in a timely manner. If we can't reproduce a bug or think a feature already exists, we might close your issue. If we're wrong, PLEASE feel free to reopen it and explain why. --Kubernetes version (use ): v1.4.x v1.5.x v1.6.x master Environment: vSphere based install with vSphere Cloud Provider enabled. Cloud provider or hardware configuration: vSphere OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): NA Kernel (e.g. ):NA Install tools:kubernetes-anywhere Others: What happened: vSphere Cloud Provider configures additional SCSI adapters to scale the number of volumes that can be attached to a VM (1 adapter = 16 disks). The code within the cloud provider does not handle this correctly. Additional disks attach successfully to the VM but when k8s verifies the attach status it fails leading to k8s retrying the attach that never succeeds. In addition to this when the SCSI adapter is created for the first time the code does not use it to attach the disk leading to a failed attach disk request to the cloud provider. What you expected to happen: Additional disks should be to the VM upto the max number supported. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Create a single node cluster and create a statefulset with 16 replicas or have a pod with more than 16 disks. Anything else we need to know:
A fix for this is coming up..
cc
Huh, I wonder if something changed between 1.3 and newer?
<!-- Thanks for filing an issue! Before hitting the button, please answer these questions.--Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST? (choose one): FEATURE REQUEST <!-- If this is a BUG REPORT, please: Fill in as much of the template below as you can. If you leave out information, we can't help you as well. If this is a FEATURE REQUEST, please: Describe in detail the feature/behavior/change you'd like to see. In both cases, be ready for followup questions, and please respond in a timely manner. If we can't reproduce a bug or think a feature already exists, we might close your issue. If we're wrong, PLEASE feel free to reopen it and explain why. --Kubernetes version (use ): Environment: Cloud provider or hardware configuration: OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Others: What happened: the psp admission controller iterates through applicable psps for both the user and the service account. This leads to at least one RBAC DENY message for each pod. What you expected to happen: "RBAC DENY" should be a more meaningful message How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): enable psp w/rbac
closing in favor of
See I think it's the last file that has no validation in pkg . Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): Cloud provider or hardware configuration**: OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): Kernel (e.g. ): Install tools: Others:
There are no sig labels on this issue. Please by: a sig: e.g., to notify the contributor experience sig, OR the label manually: e.g., to apply the label Note: Method 1 will trigger an email to the group. You can find the group list and label list . The in the method 1 has to be replaced with one of these: bugs, feature-requests, pr-reviews, test-failures, proposals
/sig api-machinery
Data as of June 3rd, 9:00 PM Eastern. Latest data can be found here: Additional Context:
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the label and provide further guidance. The label can be by org members by writing in a comment. <detailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
/sig release
cc Do we want to keep this job and fix it, or do something different considering the debs/rpms efforts?
I think we should keep this job as long as we build packages for Google infra (those are using different specs then packages for OBS).
fixed it:
Hi, I have a problem with my GCE cluster about LoadBalancer type Services It's creating a lot of unused static external IP on the google network of my project the cluster is running kubernetes v1.1.2. Tried restarting nodes, tried destroy/recreate of the entire cluster.
Seeing exactly the same issue at GKE since a few hours. First on a v1.0.7 cluster which I later upgraded to v1.1.2 to fix the problem but the issue is still there. Double checked my yaml config files but no changes from our side. Existing loadbalancers do work as before.
I dealt with this last night and a workaround was to add to the spec
Thx :+1:
We'll get this cherry picked into the two release branches once it's been verified at HEAD.
/kind bug What happened: When building kubernetes-1.7.0 packages for openSUSE, results differ for each build in and other man pages. coming from that uses and probably sets do not have any specific order, so it would need to be sorted on output. What you expected to happen: Every build should give identical results. See https://reproducible- for why this matters. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): See Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version: 1.7.0 OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): openSUSE Tumbleweed
/sig release
somehow this bug seems to have been forgotten - can you help getting the right people to have a look?
- can you please confirm that PR works for you?
I tested it and it looks good.
/assign I enjoy reading my highlights to find the issue has already been addressed. :)
Sorry this wasn't addressed sooner. It does seem like it fell into a black hole, and pinging was the right way to resolve that. :)
/area build-release
related to /reopen
Reopening this issue. <detailsIn response to : related to Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
ci-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-alpha-features kubetest.Up Jul 02 2021, 01:26:42 UTC+0200 /sig release
based on testgrid probably cc <img width="1203" alt="Screen Shot 2021-07-02 at 4 24 25 PM" src="https://user-"
/cc working on it
/assign
the scheduler fails to start with this error: it seems the feature gates from the command line does not take effect in the defaulting phrase, do you know how to fix it?
ah, found there is a cycle here: The scheduler options , but the default config's default values depend on the feature gates options. I think this disables other feature gate controlled logic in the defaulting too:
I tried to fix it by updating the component config after the CLI flags (including the feature gates) are parsed: PTAL
fixed the flake. is back green now.
thanks!
<!-- This form is for bug reports and feature requests ONLY! If you're looking for help check and the . --Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: What happened: Kubelet constantly crashes trying to evict pods under memory pressure What you expected to happen: kubelet to be able to evict pods How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Fresh 1.9.1 Kubernetes, installed via kubeadm Here are relevant eviction parameters for kubelet Anything else we need to know?: Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): Client Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"9", GitVersion:"v1.9.1", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"archive", BuildDate:"2018-01-05T20:28:28Z", GoVersion:"go1.9.2", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"} Server Version: version.Info{Major:"1", Minor:"9", GitVersion:"v1.9.1", GitCommit:"", GitTreeState:"clean", BuildDate:"2018-01-04T11:40:06Z", GoVersion:"go1.9.2", Compiler:"gc", Platform:"linux/amd64"} Cloud provider or hardware configuration: 8GiB of RAM OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): Gentoo Kernel (e.g. ): Linux 4.9.34-gentoo SMP Sat Jan 13 23:06:16 MSK 2018 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500K CPU @ 3.30GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux Install tools: Others:
contains the following code I think there is a bug in that it is iterating through InitContainers but getting resources of regular containers. I have a pod that has 3 initContainers. Looks like this could be a copy&paste error.
/sig node
indeed there's a mismatch between initContainers and spec containers, I'll take a look.
looks like we need to do the following and the problem was introduced in cc
- Indeed, I'll open a PR for this
reopening until it is cherrypicked to 1.9
It was cherry-picked in 1.9.3.
/close
8 tests failed, 2 jobs failed, 88 builds failed. Failure stats cover 1 day time range '3 Aug 2017 03:31 UTC' to '4 Aug 2017 03:31 UTC'.
There are no sig labels on this issue. Please by: a sig: e.g., to notify the contributor experience sig, OR the label manually: e.g., to apply the label Note: Method 1 will trigger an email to the group. You can find the group list and label list . The in the method 1 has to be replaced with one of these: bugs, feature-requests, pr-reviews, test-failures, proposals
/sig storage
This should have been fixed by /cc
The test panic is fixed, but now it's failing because it can't SSH into the node.
/assign
I got this by running the following against commit : There have been previous attempts to fix this: It appears it's still an issue :cry: We're also seeing it in OpenShift (), although our code hasn't pulled in the fix from quite yet.
cc
What go version are you using? Previously this test has been catching legit bugs, so I'm not sure about the "flaky" moniker.
go 1.5.1. I noticed you had a comment in another issue or PR about this possibly being a bug in Go itself (or did I misread)?
I doubt it's a bug in go. (go1.5 had an unrelated bug, maybe that's what you're thinking of.) We haven't actually flipped 1.5 on so I may sit on this for a bit.
I instrumented this code, and this is being caused by duplicate deletions causing the wait group to decrement below 0. Are duplicate deletions a bug? Or should the wait group be guarded against that?
ping If duplicate deletes are not a bug, I can put together a quick PR to guard against that. If they are a bug, I could try to track it down sometime this week (even thought I'm not that familiar with this code) if no one else is going to look into it.
Duplicate deletes are a bug. (assuming that the test harness isn't actually issuing multiple deletes for the same item.)
That would be great if you could take this, since I won't have time.
So it would be an error in the test if was called multiple times for the same pod? Or should the framework be de-duping that?
IMO, that's a test error. ...If the test is doing that because the framework dup'd an update or an add, then it's a framework error. (adds and updates shouldn't be duped, either) , krousey wrote:
from what I gather, this test is just trying to delete after each pod reaches it's final intended state. This code is deleting on every event, including intermediate ones. In particular, this test case is occasionally causing duplicate deletes to be issued: Sometimes it catches the transition from FROM to ADDMISSED, and then gets ADDMISSED to TO. I think the fix is to tell the test to only issue the delete when the final state is TO.
I'll do that and some stress testing to see if it goes away.
3589 runs so far, 10 failures and all 10 failures seem to confirm the above behavior.
Guarding against this: runs so far, 0 failures I will clean this up and send out a fix shortly.
Awesome, thanks! , krousey wrote:
Accidentally left the test case running. Good news:
It's probably safe to say that if there's remaining corner cases, your setup is not going to exercise them! :) , krousey wrote:
PLEASE COORDINATE WITH SIG-SCHEDULING BEFORE WORKING ON THIS ISSUE. We want to avoid the situation where two people accidentally start work on the same fix. Main tracking issue: In the function creates a object and populates the field with an anonymous function. At the end of that function, is called, which contains the rest of our startup logic. Rather than split this across two functions, we should put all the startup logic in one named function called (not ) so that constructing the object is much more plain. /sig scheduling /kind cleanup /help /good-first-issue
This request has been marked as suitable for new contributors. Please ensure the request meets the requirements listed . If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed by commenting with the command. <detailsIn response to : PLEASE COORDINATE WITH SIG-SCHEDULING BEFORE WORKING ON THIS ISSUE. We want to avoid the situation where two people accidentally start work on the same fix. Main tracking issue: Rather than split this across two functions, we should put all the startup logic in one named function called (not ) so that constructing the object is much more plain. /kind cleanup /help /good-first-issue </details
I'll pick this up! /assign
https://k8s- example run from https://k8s- which just edits a md file.
There are no sig labels on this issue. Please add a sig label. <detailsA sig label can be by either: a sig: e.g., to notify the contributor experience sig, OR the label manually: e.g., to apply the label Note: Method 1 will trigger an email to the group. See the . The in method 1 has to be replaced with one of these: bugs, feature-requests, pr-reviews, test-failures, proposals Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
timeout is 120s, set 360s can fix this in my local env, not sure what happened.
tracked it down to introduced in
can you take a look at
i tried the posted by a few times and noticed variations of time taken, then removed the last few commits and ran them again and saw they were stable. then all the commits back until they failed which was the last commit. Then i looked inside and noticed the random which has caused pain before (in openstack). Ack looking
<!-- This form is for bug reports and feature requests ONLY! If you're looking for help check and the . If this may be security issue, please disclose it privately via --Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: What happened: This feature is lacking coverage, especially for containerized kubelet environments.
/assign since I'm the owner of this feature.
And just fixes a bug for containerized kubelet when the mount file is an empty file.
Are we going to enable these tests in v1.11? We're getting code freeze soon.
There is a local containerized cluster pull and CI job that we can probably leverage. Right now it only runs conformance tests, we may be able to add new suites to enable other tests. Cc who can point us to the owner for the containerized testing effort
yes, seems to be holding up pretty well - https://k8s-,%20master%20(dev)
In I made pull-kubernetes-local-e2e-containerized to run also all test with string. I'm enabling some tests (subpath!) in , feel free to suggest more tests.
Ref
IIUC, the default host path type is . And when host path type is , we expect container runtime to create the host path if it doesn't exist (docker is doing that today). Is that true? If that is, we should revert part of , because container runtime should still create host path if it does not exist. /cc I tried to enforce , and got a lot of errors , e.g.:
Correct. This is mainly for backwards compatibility.
I see. If so, I'll remove the CRI definition "If the hostPath doesn't exist (e.g. hostPath volume), runtimes should report errors". Thanks!
SGTM. Refer to .
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
/remove-lifecycle stale will help fix this.
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
/remove-lifecycle stale
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle rotten
/remove-lifecycle rotten
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
/remove-lifecycle stale
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
/remove-lifecycle stale
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle stale
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh with . Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /lifecycle rotten
Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Reopen the issue with . Mark the issue as fresh with .