Change:
switch { case t.ExitCode == 1: // expected <del> case t.ExitCode == 128 && t.Reason == "ContainerCannotRun" && reBug88766.MatchString(t.Message): </del> <ins> case t.ExitCode == 128 && (t.Reason == "StartError" || t.Reason == "ContainerCannotRun") && reBug88766.MatchString(t.Message): </ins> // pod volume teardown races with container start in CRI, which reports a failure framework.Logf("pod %s on node %s failed with the symptoms of https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/88766") default:

Discussion:
<!-- 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: pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce Which test(s) are flaking: Testgrid link: Reason for failure: Anything else we need to know: Triage board shows flakes here spiked dramatically on 3/4 /sig node /priority critical-urgent /milestone v1.18
are you able to assist if this is related to recent topology work?
sure, I'll take a look
is this the test you just in ?
As mentioned above, this is a new test that was just , and the test sometimes fails. I don't see that any of the recent topology manager changes would cause these failures. I'll be happy to help out and dig more if or others think otherwise.
This is me, the bugs are untriaged containerd / Kubelet failures with low occurrence rates that this test now exposes. Investigating.
still flaking in non-dockershim environments: pod pod-submit-status-0-14 on node kind-worker2 container unexpected exit code 128: start=1970-01-01 00:00:00 +0000 UTC end=2020-03-06 16:16:54 +0000 UTC reason=StartError message=failed to create containerd task: OCI runtime create failed: starting container process caused " container init caused " mounting "/var/lib/kubelet/pods/-819e-4840-8369-" to rootfs "" at "" caused "stat /var/lib/kubelet/pods/-819e-4840-8369- no such file or directory""": unknown `
Different reason this time. Will continue to enumerate failure modes.

If a pod is created and then deleted quickly, volume teardown and the container runtime can race in a way that causes the container runtime to fail to start the container and then report an error. This is because the teardown and container start happen in parallel and cannot synchronize (container start is a call to the container runtime), so by the time the container runtime begins standing up the container the volume is unmounted. makes this flake reproducible because it explicitly tests create-delete-measure and does not exclude this specific flake. We can exclude the flake while this bug is worked. From Found in
/sig node
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 . Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or . /close
Closing this issue. <detailsIn response to : Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Reopen the issue with . Mark the issue as fresh with . /close 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
/reopen /assign
Reopened this issue. <detailsIn response to : /reopen /assign 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
/remove-lifecycle rotten /triage accepted
Recent occurrences can be found here
I was hoping this would be but I still see some instances of it in gubernator.
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-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle stale
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active 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 Close this issue or PR with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle rotten [1]:
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active 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: Reopen this issue or PR with Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /close [1]:
Closing this issue. <detailsIn response to : The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. 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 closedReopen this issue or PR with Mark this issue or PR as fresh with Offer to help out with [Issue Triage][1] 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