Change:
// Initialize CPU manager if utilfeature.DefaultFeatureGate.Enabled(kubefeatures.CPUManager) { <del> containerMap, err := buildContainerMapFromRuntime(runtimeService) if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("failed to build map of initial containers from runtime: %v", err) } err = cm.cpuManager.Start(cpumanager.ActivePodsFunc(activePods), sourcesReady, podStatusProvider, runtimeService, containerMap) </del> <ins> containerMap := buildContainerMapFromRuntime(runtimeService) err := cm.cpuManager.Start(cpumanager.ActivePodsFunc(activePods), sourcesReady, podStatusProvider, runtimeService, containerMap) </ins> if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("start cpu manager error: %v", err) }

Discussion:
What happened: with --cpu-manager-policy=static kubelet will panic when pause container lose during kubelet restarting What you expected to happen: kubelet can start normally How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible): 1,config kubelet with --cpu-manager-policy=static 2, Run a large number of pods on the test node 3,stop kubelet use command: 4,kill and remove all the pause container like this: ! 5,start kubelet use command: and then kubelet maybe panic, log is : Anything else we need to know?: When we actually encountered this problem, only one pause container was lost. In order to reproduce this bug, I deleted all pause containers. Environment: Kubernetes version (use ): 1.20.1 Cloud provider or hardware configuration: x8664 OS (e.g: ):18.04.5 LTS (Bionic Beaver) Kernel (e.g. ): Linux ecs-linux-0008-43ee 4.15.0-123-generic -Ubuntu SMP Wed Oct 21 09:40:11 UTC 2020 x8664 x8664 x8664 GNU/Linux Install tools: Network plugin and version (if this is a network-related bug): Others:
/sig node /assign
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
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-contributor-experience at . /lifecycle rotten
Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Reopen the issue with . Mark the issue as fresh with . Send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at . /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
I think it makes sense to reopen this issue as the referenced PR is still open.
/reopen
Reopened this issue. <detailsIn response to : /reopen 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
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
I am seeing this issue with a customer also. What is the timeline for this PR to be reviewed and merged?