jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
in this test the rootfs is limited to 5M and the pod is evicted by creating a 10M file with; But this fails if the fs doesn't support the fallocate syscall. The K8s e2e must not itself require support for features that K8s does not require. I am unsure why my overlay fs in containers doesn't support fallocate(2) while the fs on the node (ext4) does. I have queried on the slack. I build my Linux kernel myself but I can't find anything related. If the command is changed to; the test works on an fs that doesn't support fallocate(2). It may seem more "primitive" but it doesn't require a feature that K8s doesn't. <detailsNone </detailsNo response No response
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 testing
Interesting /Triage accepted

Related discussion:
text: Name:  "bar", Image: image, Command: []string{ <del> "/bin/sh", "-c", "sleep 10; fallocate -l 10M file; sleep 10000", </del> <ins> "/bin/sh", "-c", "sleep 10; dd if=/dev/zero of=file bs=1M count=10; sleep 10000", </ins> }, Resources: v1.ResourceRequirements{ Limits: v1.ResourceList{
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: package job import ( <del> "reflect" </del> "testing" "github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp" "github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp/cmpopts" batchv1 "k8s.io/api/batch/v1" metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1" <ins> "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/labels" </ins> "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/types" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/validation/field" genericapirequest "k8s.io/apiserver/pkg/endpoints/request"
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: Strategy.PrepareForUpdate(ctx, &tc.updatedJob, &tc.job) if diff := cmp.Diff(tc.wantJob, tc.updatedJob); diff != "" { <del> t.Errorf("Job pod failure policy (-want,+got):n%s", diff) </del> <ins> t.Errorf("Job update differences (-want,+got):n%s", diff) </ins> } }) } } <del> // TestJobStrategy_PrepareForUpdate tests various scenearios for PrepareForCreate </del> <ins> // TestJobStrategy_PrepareForCreate tests various scenarios for PrepareForCreate </ins> func TestJobStrategy_PrepareForCreate(t *testing.T) { validSelector := getValidLabelSelector() validPodTemplateSpec := getValidPodTemplateSpecForSelector(validSelector)
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: }, }, }, <ins> "job does not allow setting status on create": { job: batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: getValidObjectMeta(0), Spec: batch.JobSpec{ Selector: validSelector, Template: validPodTemplateSpec, }, Status: batch.JobStatus{ Active: 1, }, }, wantJob: batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: getValidObjectMetaWithAnnotations(1, map[string]string{batchv1.JobTrackingFinalizer: ""}), Spec: batch.JobSpec{ Selector: validSelector, Template: validPodTemplateSpec, }, }, }, </ins> } for name, tc := range cases {
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: } } <del> func TestValidateToleratingBadLabels(t *testing.T) { invalidSelector := getValidLabelSelector() invalidSelector.MatchExpressions = []metav1.LabelSelectorRequirement{{Key: "key", Operator: metav1.LabelSelectorOpNotIn, Values: []string{"bad value"}}} validPodTemplateSpec := getValidPodTemplateSpecForSelector(getValidLabelSelector()) job := &batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: getValidObjectMeta(0), Spec: batch.JobSpec{ Selector:       invalidSelector, ManualSelector: pointer.BoolPtr(true), Template:       validPodTemplateSpec, }, } job.ResourceVersion = "1" oldObj := job.DeepCopy() newObj := job.DeepCopy() context := genericapirequest.NewContext() errorList := Strategy.ValidateUpdate(context, newObj, oldObj) if len(errorList) > 0 { t.Errorf("Unexpected error list with no-op update of bad object: %v", errorList) } } func TestJobStrategyValidateUpdate(t *testing.T) { </del> <ins> func TestJobStrategy_ValidateUpdate(t *testing.T) { </ins> ctx := genericapirequest.NewDefaultContext() validSelector := &metav1.LabelSelector{ MatchLabels: map[string]string{"a": "b"},
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: }, }, update: func(job *batch.Job) { <del> // change something. </del> job.Annotations["foo"] = "bar" }, }, <ins> "deleting user annotation": { job: &batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ Name:            "myjob", Namespace:       metav1.NamespaceDefault, ResourceVersion: "0", Annotations: map[string]string{ batch.JobTrackingFinalizer: "", "foo":                      "bar", }, }, Spec: batch.JobSpec{ Selector:       validSelector, Template:       validPodTemplateSpec, ManualSelector: pointer.BoolPtr(true), Parallelism:    pointer.Int32Ptr(1), }, }, update: func(job *batch.Job) { delete(job.Annotations, "foo") }, }, </ins> "updating node selector for unsuspended job disallowed": { job: &batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
Code change:
The gets very long testing mulitple functions in such as , and . These checks should be performed in dedicated Test functions using table for different scenarios. Target functions and are being as part of The remaining checks should be migrated to these functions. Also, a test function should be to migrate the remaining tests.
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 apps
/assign
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
Any progress on this? I'm working on and I noticed that has relatively low coverage so I was going to work on getting the coverage up.
I created that is somewhat related to this.
no progess. go ahead please
/assign

Related discussion:
text: }, mutableSchedulingDirectivesEnabled: false, }, <ins> "invalid label selector": { job: &batch.Job{ ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{ Name:            "myjob", Namespace:       metav1.NamespaceDefault, ResourceVersion: "0", Annotations:     map[string]string{"foo": "bar"}, }, Spec: batch.JobSpec{ Selector: &metav1.LabelSelector{ MatchLabels:      map[string]string{"a": "b"}, MatchExpressions: []metav1.LabelSelectorRequirement{{Key: "key", Operator: metav1.LabelSelectorOpNotIn, Values: []string{"bad value"}}}, }, ManualSelector: pointer.BoolPtr(true), Template:       validPodTemplateSpec, }, }, update: func(job *batch.Job) { job.Annotations["hello"] = "world" }, }, </ins> } for name, tc := range cases { t.Run(name, func(t *testing.T) {
Code change:
When enable apiserver tracing, the webhook request spans only show spanName as /, mostly because use http request operations as default span name, which is hard to understand. ! Following the open-telemetry standard of spanName, it's recommended to use as spanName. ! SpanName of webhook request should be , like ! APIServerTracing feature gates of apiserver a pod tracing dashboard No response <details18 </details<detailsNone </details<details</details<details</details<details</details<details</details
I make a fix for this.
/sig api-machinery instrumentation
Do you know if this is fixed in later versions of opentelemetry?
/triage accepted /assign
Looks like might be related
not yet, I think we can fix this in otel upstream, but it's hard to backport to otel , which is the version of otel used in Kubernetes
Good point. It think fixing it here is a good idea in that case.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
could I take on this issue?
yes. Feel free to work on this.
! I test locally by 1.29 kubernetes and start a sample webhook, looks like the client span has already conforms to semantic conventions , which should be in the form of "HTTP {METHODNAME}"
! For apiserver as a server, now the spanName is still KubernetesAPI, which I think we could enhance it into "HTTP get_account/{accountId}" format
After digging for a while, I found one solution to implement this, I draft this idea in , could you help review about whether this is a correct way to implement it?

Related discussion:
text: "go.opentelemetry.io/contrib/instrumentation/net/http/otelhttp" semconv "go.opentelemetry.io/otel/semconv/v1.17.0" "go.opentelemetry.io/otel/trace" <ins> "k8s.io/apiserver/pkg/endpoints/request" </ins> tracing "k8s.io/component-base/tracing" )
Code change:
When enable apiserver tracing, the webhook request spans only show spanName as /, mostly because use http request operations as default span name, which is hard to understand. ! Following the open-telemetry standard of spanName, it's recommended to use as spanName. ! SpanName of webhook request should be , like ! APIServerTracing feature gates of apiserver a pod tracing dashboard No response <details18 </details<detailsNone </details<details</details<details</details<details</details<details</details
I make a fix for this.
/sig api-machinery instrumentation
Do you know if this is fixed in later versions of opentelemetry?
/triage accepted /assign
Looks like might be related
not yet, I think we can fix this in otel upstream, but it's hard to backport to otel , which is the version of otel used in Kubernetes
Good point. It think fixing it here is a good idea in that case.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
could I take on this issue?
yes. Feel free to work on this.
! I test locally by 1.29 kubernetes and start a sample webhook, looks like the client span has already conforms to semantic conventions , which should be in the form of "HTTP {METHODNAME}"
! For apiserver as a server, now the spanName is still KubernetesAPI, which I think we could enhance it into "HTTP get_account/{accountId}" format
After digging for a while, I found one solution to implement this, I draft this idea in , could you help review about whether this is a correct way to implement it?

Related discussion:
text: otelhttp.WithPropagators(tracing.Propagators()), otelhttp.WithPublicEndpoint(), otelhttp.WithTracerProvider(tp), <ins> otelhttp.WithSpanNameFormatter(func(operation string, r *http.Request) string { ctx := r.Context() info, exist := request.RequestInfoFrom(ctx) if !exist || !info.IsResourceRequest { return r.Method } return getSpanNameFromRequestInfo(info, r) }), </ins> } wrappedHandler := http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) { // Add the http.target attribute to the otelhttp span
Code change:
When enable apiserver tracing, the webhook request spans only show spanName as /, mostly because use http request operations as default span name, which is hard to understand. ! Following the open-telemetry standard of spanName, it's recommended to use as spanName. ! SpanName of webhook request should be , like ! APIServerTracing feature gates of apiserver a pod tracing dashboard No response <details18 </details<detailsNone </details<details</details<details</details<details</details<details</details
I make a fix for this.
/sig api-machinery instrumentation
Do you know if this is fixed in later versions of opentelemetry?
/triage accepted /assign
Looks like might be related
not yet, I think we can fix this in otel upstream, but it's hard to backport to otel , which is the version of otel used in Kubernetes
Good point. It think fixing it here is a good idea in that case.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules: After 90d of inactivity, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, is applied After 30d of inactivity since was applied, the issue is closed You can: Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Mark this issue or PR as rotten with Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale [1]:
/remove-lifecycle stale
could I take on this issue?
yes. Feel free to work on this.
! I test locally by 1.29 kubernetes and start a sample webhook, looks like the client span has already conforms to semantic conventions , which should be in the form of "HTTP {METHODNAME}"
! For apiserver as a server, now the spanName is still KubernetesAPI, which I think we could enhance it into "HTTP get_account/{accountId}" format
After digging for a while, I found one solution to implement this, I draft this idea in , could you help review about whether this is a correct way to implement it?

Related discussion:
text: // See https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-go/tree/main/example/passthrough return otelhttp.NewHandler(wrappedHandler, "KubernetesAPI", opts...) } <ins> func getSpanNameFromRequestInfo(info *request.RequestInfo, r *http.Request) string { spanName := "/" + info.APIPrefix if info.APIGroup != "" { spanName += "/" + info.APIGroup } spanName += "/" + info.APIVersion if info.Namespace != "" { spanName += "/namespaces/{:namespace}" } spanName += "/" + info.Resource if info.Name != "" { spanName += "/" + "{:name}" } if info.Subresource != "" { spanName += "/" + info.Subresource } return r.Method + " " + spanName } </ins>