Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Expose ingress configuration options for missing backends #3342

Merged

Conversation

kc9ddi
Copy link
Contributor

@kc9ddi kc9ddi commented Aug 16, 2023

Issue

This PR fixes #3330

Description

This PR adds command line flags to specify whether the the controller should tolerate missing backend services and actions. If the flags are not specified, the default value will be to tolerate missing backend actions and services (which is the current behavior.)

The code changes here are simply to thread these values through to enhanced_backend_builder.go, and rely on them rather than using the defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendService and defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendAction constant fields. The logic here is already unit tested, so no new tests have been added.

Checklist

  • Added tests that cover your change (if possible)
  • Added/modified documentation as required (such as the README.md, or the docs directory)
  • Manually tested
  • Made sure the title of the PR is a good description that can go into the release notes

BONUS POINTS checklist: complete for good vibes and maybe prizes?! 🤯

  • Backfilled missing tests for code in same general area 🎉
  • Refactored something and made the world a better place 🌟

This PR adds command line flags to specify whether the the controller should tolerate missing backend services and actions. If the flags are not specified, the default value will be to tolerate missing backend actions and services (which is the current behavior.)

The code changes here are simply to thread these values through to `enhanced_backend_builder.go`, and rely on them rather than using the `defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendService` and `defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendAction` constant fields. The logic here is already unit tested, so no new tests have been added.
@linux-foundation-easycla
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Aug 16, 2023

CLA Signed

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. label Aug 16, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @kc9ddi!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/aws-load-balancer-controller 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/aws-load-balancer-controller has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Aug 16, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @kc9ddi. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 16, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Aug 24, 2023
@kc9ddi
Copy link
Contributor Author

kc9ddi commented Aug 30, 2023

Hi @M00nF1sh and @oliviassss, I just wanted to confirm that review of this PR isn't waiting on me for anything?

@oliviassss
Copy link
Collaborator

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Sep 4, 2023
@kc9ddi
Copy link
Contributor Author

kc9ddi commented Sep 6, 2023

/retest-required

@oliviassss
Copy link
Collaborator

/lgtm
/assign @M00nF1sh

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 7, 2023
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 55.55% and project coverage change: +0.11% 🎉

Comparison is base (aa893b5) 55.61% compared to head (84c192e) 55.73%.
Report is 44 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3342      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   55.61%   55.73%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         149      149              
  Lines        8819     8831      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits         4905     4922      +17     
+ Misses       3577     3575       -2     
+ Partials      337      334       -3     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
pkg/config/ingress_config.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/ingress/enhanced_backend_builder.go 90.32% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@M00nF1sh M00nF1sh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kc9ddi, M00nF1sh

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 16, 2023
@oliviassss
Copy link
Collaborator

/retest

@oliviassss oliviassss added the tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges. label Oct 16, 2023
@oliviassss oliviassss merged commit 36c6c4f into kubernetes-sigs:main Oct 16, 2023
shraddhabang pushed a commit to shraddhabang/aws-load-balancer-controller that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2023
…-sigs#3342)

* Expose configuration for missing backends

This PR adds command line flags to specify whether the the controller should tolerate missing backend services and actions. If the flags are not specified, the default value will be to tolerate missing backend actions and services (which is the current behavior.)

The code changes here are simply to thread these values through to `enhanced_backend_builder.go`, and rely on them rather than using the `defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendService` and `defaultTolerateNonExistentBackendAction` constant fields. The logic here is already unit tested, so no new tests have been added.

* add new settings to values.yaml
johngmyers pushed a commit to johngmyers/aws-load-balancer-controller that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2024
…lity

Merge in DEL/aws-load-balancer-controller-fork from IENGOC-39 to main

* commit '3e26f86e82a5d419a7f8adfc5c95dd45984be6f4':
  IENGOC-39: Remediate more bd vulnerabilities
  IENGOC-39: Remediate bd vulnerabilities
  cut v2.6.2 release (kubernetes-sigs#3453)
  update ci e2e script for cert IDs (kubernetes-sigs#3392)
  fix test failure
  doc updates (kubernetes-sigs#3426)
  Change of text "your-cluster-name" (kubernetes-sigs#3152)
  slice init style suggestion
  whitespace
  group errors, emit one event per reconcile, requeue on failure
  don't block TGB reconciliation loop on failed SG ingress reconciliation
  fix: remove service from function args
  feat: resolve health check port name for NLB
  Expose ingress configuration options for missing backends (kubernetes-sigs#3342)
  Stricter dependency/security review
  remove unnecessary patch requests (kubernetes-sigs#3380)
  increase timeout to 2h in ci scripts
  wait for the TG to be healthy before cleanup any resource
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. tide/merge-method-squash Denotes a PR that should be squashed by tide when it merges.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Expose configuration for tolerateNonExistentBackendService and tolerateNonExistentBackendAction
5 participants