jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: maxBudget time.Duration } <del> func newTimeBudget(stopCh <-chan struct{}) *timeBudget { result := &timeBudget{ </del> <ins> func newTimeBudget(stopCh <-chan struct{}) timeBudget { result := &timeBudgetImpl{ </ins> budget:    time.Duration(0), refresh:   refreshPerSecond, maxBudget: maxBudget,
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: return result } <del> func (t *timeBudget) periodicallyRefresh(stopCh <-chan struct{}) { </del> <ins> func (t *timeBudgetImpl) periodicallyRefresh(stopCh <-chan struct{}) { </ins> ticker := time.NewTicker(time.Second) defer ticker.Stop() for {
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: } } <del> func (t *timeBudget) takeAvailable() time.Duration { </del> <ins> func (t *timeBudgetImpl) takeAvailable() time.Duration { </ins> t.Lock() defer t.Unlock() result := t.budget
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: return result } <del> func (t *timeBudget) returnUnused(unused time.Duration) { </del> <ins> func (t *timeBudgetImpl) returnUnused(unused time.Duration) { </ins> t.Lock() defer t.Unlock() if unused < 0 {
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: ) func TestTimeBudget(t *testing.T) { <del> budget := &timeBudget{ </del> <ins> budget := &timeBudgetImpl{ </ins> budget:    time.Duration(0), maxBudget: time.Duration(200), }
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about flaky tests or jobs (pass or fail with no underlying change in code) in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are flaking: bazel-test-master (periodic-kubernetes-bazel-test-master ) Which test(s) are flaking: gotest: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: links to appreciated links to specific failures in spyglass appreciated <!-- Please see the deflaking doc () for more guidance! --cc
/sig api-machinery
This is continuing to be flaky with more recent failure:
/assign Would you mind taking a look here? thanks! /triage accepted
- can we somehow uncover when this started happening? This test is very old and it seems it started happening very recently, so it would be helpful to see when this started happening...
Triage shows flakes starting ~Sept 30: Before Sept 30 it seems the job was flaking much less frequently.
Might be related to I will take a look.
It seems it's not related to that PR (neither to the previous: ) As there were already failures like that on Sep 24th (before this one was merged). I will take a deeper look.
OK - it's not related to any changes mentioned before. I can reproduce this particular failure by simply adding somewhere in this block: So it's probably connected to cpu-starvation at the test level and the solution is to switch to less aggressive timeouts. Will send out a PR.
Actually - it appeared to be slightly more subtle then that. But I already fully understand the problem. It's purely test issue, but require a bit more changes (and I won't get to it today/tomorrow). I will send a fix for that early next week.
- if that changes anything from your tracking perspective ^^
No board changes yet - the next stage is "Observing" once this issue gets closed :) If you have time - I'd love to pick your brain/understand the error more thoroughly though! Hoping you drop a good explanation in your PR next week
Thanks for sharing those insights, on your discovery of the solution to this bug.
It seems the PR didn't address that fully. Looking.
out for review

Related discussion:
text: shouldContinue = false } } <del> case <-time.After(2 * time.Second): </del> <ins> case <-time.After(wait.ForeverTestTimeout): </ins> shouldContinue = false w2.Stop() }
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about continuously failing tests or jobs in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are failing: gci-gce-serial-kube-dns-nodecache Which test(s) are failing: N/A Since when has it been failing: 10/13 Testgrid link: https://k8s- Reason for failure: Cluster failed to start: Anything else we need to know: /cc
So, is a failing job, we can see that there is a error around binding to a specific IP address. In passing jobs, the initial core file isn't printed out () so not sure how to do an apples to apples comparison of what is broken here yet.
/kind bug I have been looking at this offline with and The only difference between a failing and a passing job is the arguments to the bind plugin. Failing Job: Link - Image - Config: Passing Job: Link - Image: Config:
Issue is reproducible when spinning up a cluster via kubetest using:
changes to lines 907-910 in hack/local-up- and lines 2467 to 2469 in configure- seem like the issue.
What we see is substitution works correctly for line , but for line , it replaces "PILLARLOCALDNS" with empty string.
/assign Can you investigate?
Yeah lookin into it
Regex is matching the entire line :). Should be easy fix . Will verify in hack local up and issue PR shortly
/sig network /triage accepted

Related discussion:
text: setup-addon-manifests "addons" "0-dns/nodelocaldns" local -r localdns_file="${dst_dir}/0-dns/nodelocaldns/nodelocaldns.yaml" setup-addon-custom-yaml "addons" "0-dns/nodelocaldns" "nodelocaldns.yaml" "${CUSTOM_NODELOCAL_DNS_YAML:-}" <del> # Replace the sed configurations with variable values. sed -i -e "s/_.*_DNS__DOMAIN__/${DNS_DOMAIN}/g" "${localdns_file}" sed -i -e "s/_.*_DNS__SERVER__/${DNS_SERVER_IP}/g" "${localdns_file}" sed -i -e "s/_.*_LOCAL__DNS__/${LOCAL_DNS_IP}/g" "${localdns_file}" </del> <ins> # eventually all the __PILLAR__ stuff will be gone, but theyre still in nodelocaldns for backward compat. sed -i -e "s/__PILLAR__DNS__DOMAIN__/${DNS_DOMAIN}/g" "${localdns_file}" sed -i -e "s/__PILLAR__DNS__SERVER__/${DNS_SERVER_IP}/g" "${localdns_file}" sed -i -e "s/__PILLAR__LOCAL__DNS__/${LOCAL_DNS_IP}/g" "${localdns_file}" </ins> } # Sets up the manifests of netd for k8s addons.
Code change:
<!-- Please only use this template for submitting reports about continuously failing tests or jobs in Kubernetes CI --Which jobs are failing: gci-gce-serial-kube-dns-nodecache Which test(s) are failing: N/A Since when has it been failing: 10/13 Testgrid link: https://k8s- Reason for failure: Cluster failed to start: Anything else we need to know: /cc
So, is a failing job, we can see that there is a error around binding to a specific IP address. In passing jobs, the initial core file isn't printed out () so not sure how to do an apples to apples comparison of what is broken here yet.
/kind bug I have been looking at this offline with and The only difference between a failing and a passing job is the arguments to the bind plugin. Failing Job: Link - Image - Config: Passing Job: Link - Image: Config:
Issue is reproducible when spinning up a cluster via kubetest using:
changes to lines 907-910 in hack/local-up- and lines 2467 to 2469 in configure- seem like the issue.
What we see is substitution works correctly for line , but for line , it replaces "PILLARLOCALDNS" with empty string.
/assign Can you investigate?
Yeah lookin into it
Regex is matching the entire line :). Should be easy fix . Will verify in hack local up and issue PR shortly
/sig network /triage accepted

Related discussion:
text: function start_nodelocaldns { cp "${KUBE_ROOT}/cluster/addons/dns/nodelocaldns/nodelocaldns.yaml" nodelocaldns.yaml <del> # .* because of the __PILLLAR__ references that eventually will be removed ${SED} -i -e "s/_.*_DNS__DOMAIN__/${DNS_DOMAIN}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml ${SED} -i -e "s/_.*_DNS__SERVER__/${DNS_SERVER_IP}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml ${SED} -i -e "s/_.*_LOCAL__DNS__/${LOCAL_DNS_IP}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml </del> <ins> # eventually all the __PILLAR__ stuff will be gone, but theyre still in nodelocaldns for backward compat. ${SED} -i -e "s/__PILLAR__DNS__DOMAIN__/${DNS_DOMAIN}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml ${SED} -i -e "s/__PILLAR__DNS__SERVER__/${DNS_SERVER_IP}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml ${SED} -i -e "s/__PILLAR__LOCAL__DNS__/${LOCAL_DNS_IP}/g" nodelocaldns.yaml </ins> # use kubectl to create nodelocaldns addon ${KUBECTL} --kubeconfig="${CERT_DIR}/admin.kubeconfig" --namespace=kube-system create -f nodelocaldns.yaml echo "NodeLocalDNS addon successfully deployed."
Code change:
What would you like to be : Add integration tests for Why is this needed: This is part of the kubernetes/enhancements /sig cli /priority important-soon
/assign
/triage accepted

Related discussion:
text: source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/core.sh" source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/crd.sh" source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/create.sh" <ins> source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/debug.sh" </ins> source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/delete.sh" source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/diff.sh" source "${KUBE_ROOT}/test/cmd/discovery.sh"
Code change:
What would you like to be : Add integration tests for Why is this needed: This is part of the kubernetes/enhancements /sig cli /priority important-soon
/assign
/triage accepted

Related discussion:
text: record_command run_wait_tests <ins> #################### # kubectl debug    # #################### if kube::test::if_supports_resource "${pods}" ; then record_command run_kubectl_debug_pod_tests fi if kube::test::if_supports_resource "${nodes}" ; then record_command run_kubectl_debug_node_tests fi </ins> cleanup_tests }
Code change:
What would you like to be : e2e test for service ExternalIPs Why is this needed: There is no test covering Service ExternalIPs Since we can not assume that the e2e binary will have connectivity against the nodes and that we can add routes to the environment, we are going to test it from a pod. I've verified that this works locally with the following commands: The test should leverage current framework, maybe something as A good example is here, maybe adding a ?
/sig network /help wanted /triage accepted
/help wanted /good-first-issue
/assign
I'd like to pick this up!
Ok,I'm not started :) /unassign /assign
There are two different externalIP codepaths, one for the case where the claimed external IP exists as an IP on the default interface, and one for where it does not. I suppose we could just temporarily add an IP to the default interface...
good idea Dan Please remember, it has to work for IPv6 and for IPv4 ... anyway, we can address these things during the review
This has been partially implemented with . Covering the code path for when an IP is does not exist on a node. I'll assign this back to you so you can split this issue or close it in favor of another issue. Thanks! /unassign /assign
what is the different codepath for ExternalIPs that already exist on the host? ~My reading is that the only difference is that it opens a local socket on that port, can you expand on this?~ Found it
so, it seems that this work in some environments because they are not using the bridge plugin why is not allowed that pods can reach ExternalIPs?
Wow, this is ancient and needs some fixing. This is not about preventing pod traffic from reaching those IPs. I had to really stare at it, and I am not 100% in my interpretation. First, we recognize such traffic from "off machine" (!physdev-is-in && !src=LOCAL, which we should probably switch to localDetector) and steer it to the Service. Second, we recognize ANY such traffic that is destined for a LOCAL address and shortcut that to the Service, Implicitly, traffic destined for this IP where the IP is not local goes to the system's default routing logic. The reliance on the bridge plugin is awful and archaic and I will buy a beverage of your choice for whomever gets rid of that. I think localDetector can cover this, but not 100% sure
but the ExternalIP belongs to a service and we(kube-proxy) "knows" where to send it (to the service) , that is the part I'm not sure to understand, because whatever the user is doing with that ExternalIP it has to send it back to the cluster to reach the service. However, there is always context that is important and maybe I'm missing something. Assuming we want to handle ALL the ExternalIP traffic with kube-proxy, the logic will be much simpler: traffic to an externalIP will be ALWAYS sent to the Service (DNAT) if traffic is NOT LOCAL, we also SNAT
/remove-good-first-issue /remove-help-wanted

Related discussion:
text: if err != nil { return err } <ins> if len(externalIPs) > 0 { for _, externalIP := range externalIPs { err = testReachabilityOverExternalIP(externalIP, servicePort, pod) if err != nil { return err } } } </ins> } return nil }
Code change:
<!-- 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: Using example for from documentation failed with: What you expected to happen: Example from documentation works. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): How should configuration look like for ? Environment: Kubernetes version (use ):OS (e.g: ):Kernel (e.g. ):
/sig scheduling
/triage accepted oh, I missed a dash. It should be: Would you mind sending a PR to kubernetes/website?

Related discussion:
text: <del> ## Contributor guidelines 1. Please read our [contributor guidelines](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md). 1. See our [developer guide](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/development.md). 1. Follow the instructions for [labeling and writing a release note for this PR](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/devel/pull-requests.md#release-notes) in the block below. (_this would also contain updated detail later about this new template_) ```release-note * Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state * Clear this block to use the PR title as the release note -OR- * Enter your extended release note here ``` </del>