jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
If I run first time it goes fine (after reboot). For subsequent runs I get nodes NotReady. I've tried restarting docker but that won't help. Before christams this used to work all the time. Running Arch Linux if it helps. In I see
/sig node
ditto for me: Looking for a work around I noticed that HugePages recently moved to beta. I can get pods to start again by disabling the HugePages feature gate .
/assign
cc
default Arch kernel doesn't have a hugetlb cgroup controller compiled in(been there done that, I use Arch as well), so you have to prepare your own kernel to run it.
If it were a kernel problem I would have expected the kubelet to fail the first time it was started rather than the second time. This isn't confined to Arch, though. I'm having the same problem with the default Debian kernel:
can you check if your Kernel was compiled with flag? You can do it by running: I bet we have to add documentation, describing this behavior. On Ubuntu 16.04 machine:
Sure, looks like it was not: Documentation (especially in the error message) would be great, but if the kubelet isn't going to survive a restart, I would prefer that it not start the first time. Better to fail immediately than eventually.
can you please check if works (as in fails!) for you?
No, this doesn't resolve the issue. Logs from the first start: Logs from the second start:
Do you have the directory? in that case what i have is insufficient :( If you don't have that directory, then we should probably look for a better spot to put that check? any advice?
No, that directory is missing on my system:
I'm seeing this issue as well.
I am preparing a fix to not fail when hugetlb mount is not present. Will post a fix shortly.
I posted a fix here:

Related discussion:
text: func getStatsSupportedSubsystems(cgroupPaths map[string]string) (*libcontainercgroups.Stats, error) { stats := libcontainercgroups.NewStats() <del> for _, sys := range getSupportedSubsystems() { </del> <ins> for sys, required := range getSupportedSubsystems() { </ins> if _, ok := cgroupPaths[sys.Name()]; !ok { <del> return nil, fmt.Errorf("Failed to find subsystem mount for subsystem: %v", sys.Name()) </del> <ins> if required { return nil, fmt.Errorf("Failed to find subsystem mount for required subsystem: %v", sys.Name()) } // the cgroup is not mounted, but its not required so continue... glog.V(6).Infof("Unable to find subsystem mount for optional subsystem: %v", sys.Name()) continue </ins> } if err := sys.GetStats(cgroupPaths[sys.Name()], stats); err != nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("Failed to get stats for supported subsystems : %v", err)
Code change:
/kind bug What happened: When I want to enable both plugins by passing below flag, as they both need config file, and I find I donot know what to set If I set , then I get an error in apiserver
/kind bug /sig auth
/cc
/cc
first, you can't put comments in json. the error was complaining about your embedded comments. this would let the server start: second, the docs are really, really, not right (opened with fixes). if you want to specify config for multiple plugins, should point to a config that references individual config files for each plugin (which there's a bug in loading... fixed in ): example
/assign

Related discussion:
text: if !(runtime.IsMissingVersion(err) || runtime.IsMissingKind(err) || runtime.IsNotRegisteredError(err)) { return nil, err } <ins> // Only tolerate load errors if the file appears to be one of the two legacy plugin configs unstructuredData := map[string]interface{}{} if err2 := yaml.Unmarshal(data, &unstructuredData); err2 != nil { return nil, err } _, isLegacyImagePolicy := unstructuredData["imagePolicy"] _, isLegacyPodNodeSelector := unstructuredData["podNodeSelectorPluginConfig"] if !isLegacyImagePolicy && !isLegacyPodNodeSelector { return nil, err } </ins> // convert the legacy format to the new admission control format // in order to preserve backwards compatibility, we set plugins that // previously read input from a non-versioned file configuration to the
Code change:
/kind bug What happened: When I want to enable both plugins by passing below flag, as they both need config file, and I find I donot know what to set If I set , then I get an error in apiserver
/kind bug /sig auth
/cc
/cc
first, you can't put comments in json. the error was complaining about your embedded comments. this would let the server start: second, the docs are really, really, not right (opened with fixes). if you want to specify config for multiple plugins, should point to a config that references individual config files for each plugin (which there's a bug in loading... fixed in ): example
/assign

Related discussion:
text: "k8s.io/client-go/rest" ) <del> var scheme = runtime.NewScheme() </del> <ins> var configScheme = runtime.NewScheme() </ins> func init() { <del> apiserverapi.AddToScheme(scheme) apiserverapiv1alpha1.AddToScheme(scheme) </del> <ins> apiserverapi.AddToScheme(configScheme) apiserverapiv1alpha1.AddToScheme(configScheme) </ins> } // AdmissionOptions holds the admission options
Code change:
/kind bug What happened: When I want to enable both plugins by passing below flag, as they both need config file, and I find I donot know what to set If I set , then I get an error in apiserver
/kind bug /sig auth
/cc
/cc
first, you can't put comments in json. the error was complaining about your embedded comments. this would let the server start: second, the docs are really, really, not right (opened with fixes). if you want to specify config for multiple plugins, should point to a config that references individual config files for each plugin (which there's a bug in loading... fixed in ): example
/assign

Related discussion:
text: pluginNames = a.enabledPluginNames() } <del> pluginsConfigProvider, err := admission.ReadAdmissionConfiguration(pluginNames, a.ConfigFile, scheme) </del> <ins> pluginsConfigProvider, err := admission.ReadAdmissionConfiguration(pluginNames, a.ConfigFile, configScheme) </ins> if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("failed to read plugin config: %v", err) }
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1:go_default_library", "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime:go_default_library", "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime/serializer:go_default_library", <ins> "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime/serializer/json:go_default_library", </ins> "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/runtime:go_default_library", "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/uuid:go_default_library", "//vendor/k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/wait:go_default_library",
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime/serializer" <ins> "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime/serializer/json" </ins> utilruntime "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/runtime" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/uuid" "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/wait"
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: // ConfigFile is the location of the scheduler server's configuration file. ConfigFile string <ins> // WriteConfigTo is the path where the default configuration will be written. WriteConfigTo string </ins> // config is the scheduler server's configuration object. config *componentconfig.KubeSchedulerConfiguration
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: // AddFlags adds flags for a specific SchedulerServer to the specified FlagSet func (o *Options) AddFlags(fs *pflag.FlagSet) { fs.StringVar(&o.ConfigFile, "config", o.ConfigFile, "The path to the configuration file.") <ins> fs.StringVar(&o.WriteConfigTo, "write-config-to", o.WriteConfigTo, "If set, write the configuration values to this file and exit.") </ins> // All flags below here are deprecated and will eventually be removed.
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: } func (o *Options) Complete() error { <del> if len(o.ConfigFile) == 0 { glog.Warning("WARNING: all flags other than --config are deprecated. Please begin using a config file ASAP.") </del> <ins> if len(o.ConfigFile) == 0 && len(o.WriteConfigTo) == 0 { glog.Warning("WARNING: all flags other than --config, --write-config-to, and --cleanup are deprecated. Please begin using a config file ASAP.") </ins> o.applyDeprecatedHealthzAddressToConfig() o.applyDeprecatedHealthzPortToConfig() o.applyDeprecatedAlgorithmSourceOptionsToConfig() } <ins> if len(o.ConfigFile) > 0 { if c, err := o.loadConfigFromFile(o.ConfigFile); err != nil { return err } else { o.config = c } } // Apply algorithms based on feature gates. // TODO: make configurable? algorithmprovider.ApplyFeatureGates() </ins> return nil }
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: } func (o *Options) Run() error { <del> config := o.config if len(o.ConfigFile) > 0 { if c, err := o.loadConfigFromFile(o.ConfigFile); err != nil { return err } else { config = c } </del> <ins> // If user only want to generate a configure file. if len(o.WriteConfigTo) > 0 { return o.writeConfigFile() </ins> } <del> // Apply algorithms based on feature gates. // TODO: make configurable? algorithmprovider.ApplyFeatureGates() server, err := NewSchedulerServer(config, o.master) </del> <ins> server, err := NewSchedulerServer(o.config, o.master) </ins> if err != nil { return err }
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: /kind bug What happened: We face But there is no way to generate default config file How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Environment: Kubernetes version 1.9.2
I'll take a look it /sig scheduling
/assign
Hi, same issue with controller-manager
Any updates here? , and don't have this flag. Is it even will be supported?
/cc
if not set, component should be use default value; why we'd like to dump all default config?
Because the documentation on the config file format is either nonexistent or difficult to find. If the program itself can generate a template, that fulfills (most of) the need for documentation of the format.
+1 for this, from my expirence, add an option to write the default config is really helpful.
/assign
also in 1.10
Deprecating all flags, prompting folks to use config files in advance is great, except when there's no documentation nor example anywhere. That means that we can't actually migrate to the new settings, and I can't seem to find clear alpha/beta/stable status for the new config file spec, nor timeline for the removal. It is also pretty confusing that the scheduler expects us to use a config file, but the controller-manager does not?
This issue indeed applies to kube-controller-manager. And there should already had deprecation policy.
According to , the flag will be available in . Since I can't find any reference online to an example config file, perhaps one could be provided or linked to here?
will you be able to pick my patch and generate a config file? I do not get my devbox handy so can only post here until Monday.

Related discussion:
text: return server.Run(stop) } <ins> func (o *Options) writeConfigFile() error { var encoder runtime.Encoder mediaTypes := o.codecs.SupportedMediaTypes() for _, info := range mediaTypes { if info.MediaType == "application/yaml" { encoder = info.Serializer break } } if encoder == nil { return errors.New("unable to locate yaml encoder") } encoder = json.NewYAMLSerializer(json.DefaultMetaFactory, o.scheme, o.scheme) encoder = o.codecs.EncoderForVersion(encoder, componentconfigv1alpha1.SchemeGroupVersion) configFile, err := os.Create(o.WriteConfigTo) if err != nil { return err } defer configFile.Close() if err := encoder.Encode(o.config, configFile); err != nil { return err } glog.Infof("Wrote configuration to: %sn", o.WriteConfigTo) return nil } </ins> // NewSchedulerCommand creates a *cobra.Command object with default parameters func NewSchedulerCommand() *cobra.Command { opts, err := NewOptions()
Code change:
Is this a BUG REPORT or FEATURE REQUEST?: Bug Report /kind bug What happened: Applying a file that has no changes compared to current will output something like , which muddles the output when using What you expected to happen: Using the -o flag should suppress the unchanged messages in stdout to prevent output from being muddled How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): Given the file Will result in proper yaml being generated as expected Run again, and is outputted to stdout, and is invalid yaml Anything else we need to know?: I do need to check whether this still affects the most recent version kubectl Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): 1.8.6 Cloud provider or hardware configuration: OS (e.g. from /etc/os-release): Kernel (e.g. ): Darwin Install tools: Others:
confirmed on latest stable version (1.9.2)
Reiterating the mentions to trigger a notification: <detailsIn response to : confirmed on latest stable version (1.9.2) 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
I have a solution to this, still waiting on my company to look over the agreement

Related discussion:
text: return cmdutil.AddSourceToErr(fmt.Sprintf("retrieving modified configuration from:n%vnfor:", info), info.Source, err) } <ins> // Print object only if output format other than "name" is specified printObject := len(output) > 0 && !shortOutput </ins> if err := info.Get(); err != nil { if !errors.IsNotFound(err) { return cmdutil.AddSourceToErr(fmt.Sprintf("retrieving current configuration of:n%vnfrom server for:", info), info.Source, err)