Utilize jobframework setups #1630

tenzen-y · 2024-01-22T11:20:10Z

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

I utilized setup functions for the jobframeworks so that the platform developers can avoid to copy those functions to separate in-house controllers.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part-of #1601

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Expose utilization functions to setup jobframework reconcilers and webhooks

k8s-ci-robot · 2024-01-22T11:20:15Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tenzen-y

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [tenzen-y]

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

netlify · 2024-01-22T11:20:17Z

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-kueue canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`4ab6b5f`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-sigs-kueue/deploys/65b16fabb36a49000820f33b

mimowo · 2024-01-22T14:05:05Z

pkg/config/config.go

+	return sets.New(cfg.Integrations.Frameworks...)
+}
+
+func IsWaitForPodsReadyEnable(cfg *configapi.Configuration) bool {


Suggested change

func IsWaitForPodsReadyEnable(cfg *configapi.Configuration) bool {

func IsWaitForPodsReadyEnabled(cfg *configapi.Configuration) bool {

maybe this will read better

mimowo · 2024-01-22T14:30:38Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework_test.go

+			gotWls := &kueue.WorkloadList{}
+			if tc.wantFieldMatcherError {
+				// Given that the `wantFieldMatcherError` is `true`, a list operation without fieldMatcher should succeed.
+				if gotListErr := k8sClient.List(ctx, gotWls, client.InNamespace(testNamespace)); gotListErr != nil {


IIUC, this operation would succeed also when wantFieldMatcherError=false, right? If so, what is the purpose of this check and making it conditional?

IIUC, this operation would succeed also when wantFieldMatcherError=false, right?

Yes, that's right.

the purpose of this check

I wanted to verify that this operation would succeeded when we don't use the fieldMatcher.
We probably also should verify that the gotWls has the proper workloads here.

making it conditional?

I wanted to avoid unnecessary checks when the wantFieldMatcherError=false.

We probably also should verify that the gotWls has the proper workloads here.

I think so.

I wanted to avoid unnecessary checks when the wantFieldMatcherError=false.

I see, but maybe we can remove the conditional for simplicity. Or, alternatively, add a comment why it is checked.

I see, but maybe we can remove the conditional for simplicity.

I'm ok with removing the conditional since this is a unit test, and increasing the test execution time almost wouldn't happen.

mimowo · 2024-01-22T15:13:36Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework_test.go

+	}
+	for name, tc := range cases {
+		t.Run(name, func(t *testing.T) {
+			ctx := context.Background()


Make sure the ctx is closed at the end of each test case

Does this mean the following?

ctx, cancel := context.WithCancel(context.Background()) defer cancel()

IIUC, the context.Background() generates an empty context.
So I think that we need not such a check.
If my understanding isn't correct, let me know.

I see, it is empty. Still, we need to be careful passing it to other functions. When a function starts goroutines using the context they may leak because the context is not closed. Thus, it seems a safe practice to use the snippet as you pasted to make sure the context passed to any functions is closed after the test case.

It makes sense. Let's make sure that the context is closed.

mimowo · 2024-01-22T15:15:29Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework_test.go

+			},
+			modifyOpts: func(fwkName string, opts ...Option) ([]Option, error) { return opts, nil },
+		},
+		"modifyOptions returns errors": {


can we add a test case when kubeflow is enabled, but there is no mapper for it?

Proving no errors occur would be valuable In that case. Thanks!

kueue/pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework.go

Line 52 in 5d17773

log.Info("No matching API in the server for job framework, skipped setup of controller and webhook")

mimowo · 2024-01-22T15:17:30Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework_test.go

+		filter                client.ListOption
+		wantError             error
+		wantFieldMatcherError bool
+		wantList              []string


Suggested change

wantList []string

wantWorkloads []string

nit

mimowo · 2024-01-22T15:18:07Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework_test.go

+
+	cases := map[string]struct {
+		opts                  []Option
+		wls                   []client.Object


Suggested change

wls []client.Object

workloads []client.Object

nit

mimowo · 2024-01-23T11:49:10Z

/lgtm
The remaining comment from me #1630 isn't blocking.
/assign @alculquicondor

tenzen-y · 2024-01-23T17:21:47Z

@tenzen-y: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
pull-kueue-verify-main 67ef390 link unknown /test pull-kueue-verify-main
pull-kueue-test-unit-main 67ef390 link unknown /test pull-kueue-test-unit-main
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

It seems that I need to rebase this PR.

tenzen-y · 2024-01-23T17:57:15Z

/assign @alculquicondor

alculquicondor · 2024-01-23T18:46:55Z

cmd/kueue/main.go

-		jobframework.WithManageJobsWithoutQueueName(manageJobsWithoutQueueName),
-		jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(waitForPodsReady(cfg)),
+		jobframework.WithManageJobsWithoutQueueName(cfg.ManageJobsWithoutQueueName),
+		jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(config.IsWaitForPodsReadyEnabled(cfg.WaitForPodsReady)),


What about something like this?
I don't think we should need two separate functions to process the configuration.

Suggested change

jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(config.IsWaitForPodsReadyEnabled(cfg.WaitForPodsReady)),

jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(cfg.WaitForPodsReady),

It makes sense.

Also I think we can apply the same way to EnabledFrameworks.

alculquicondor · 2024-01-23T18:47:45Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework.go

+
+func SetupControllers(
+	mgr ctrl.Manager,
+	setupLog logr.Logger,


Suggested change

setupLog logr.Logger,

log logr.Logger,

cmd/kueue/main.go

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

tenzen-y · 2024-01-24T18:20:29Z

/hold cancel

@alculquicondor I rebased this PR. Please take another look.

alculquicondor · 2024-01-24T19:19:45Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework.go

+	// The controllers won't work until the webhooks are operating, and the webhook won't work until the
+	// certs are all in place.
+	cert.WaitForCertsReady(log, certsReady)


Did you forget to remove this from main?

Or maybe it shouldn't be here.

Both here and the main one is intended although I should replace

kueue/cmd/kueue/main.go

Lines 222 to 226 in 78acd53

// The controllers won't work until the webhooks are operating, and the webhook won't work until the

// certs are all in place.

setupLog.Info("Waiting for certificate generation to complete")

<-certsReady

setupLog.Info("Certs ready")

with cert.WaitForCertsReady().

I think we need to perform cert.WaitForCertsReady() here since in the in-house custom job kueue-manager, only this function launches controllers and webhooks.

However, the kueue-manager launches controllers and webooks in this function and main's setupControllers().

So, I think both Is needed. @alculquicondor WDYT?

yeah, but maybe they didn't setup certs at all? I think they can call the function if they need it.

It makes sense. Let's remove it from here.
They can call WaitForCertsReady() since it is an exported one.

alculquicondor · 2024-01-24T19:21:08Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework.go

+	errFailedMappingResource = errors.New("restMapper failed mapping resource")
+)
+
+func SetupControllers(mgr ctrl.Manager, log logr.Logger, certsReady chan struct{}, opts ...Option) error {


Add comments for how/when this should be used

It makes sense.

alculquicondor · 2024-01-24T19:22:45Z

pkg/controller/jobframework/jobframework.go

maybe this file should be named setup.go?

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

tenzen-y · 2024-01-24T20:16:08Z

The above CI error occurred due to a connection error with the go proxy server.

../../../pkg/mod/github.com/onsi/ginkgo/[email protected]/ginkgo/labels/labels_command.go:15:2: golang.org/x/[email protected]: read "https:/proxy.golang.org/@v/v0.16.1.zip": stream error: stream ID 23; INTERNAL_ERROR; received from peer
make: *** [Makefile:322: ginkgo] Error 1

https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-jenkins/pr-logs/pull/kubernetes-sigs_kueue/1630/pull-kueue-test-e2e-main-1-29/1750246773613400064

tenzen-y · 2024-01-24T20:21:18Z

@alculquicondor I addressed all comments. PTAL, thanks.

alculquicondor

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2024-01-24T21:29:10Z

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: f0805ea43f86cb0c0af3ba4d381d4e41ebe05325

* Utilize jobframework setups Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]> * Use WaitForCertsReady function in main setupControllers Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]> * Add a comment how/when use the utilized functions Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]> * Rename jobframework.go with setup.go Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]> * No wait for certs get ready inside the SetupControlers Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]> --------- Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. labels Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot requested review from denkensk and mimowo January 22, 2024 11:20

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 22, 2024

tenzen-y changed the title ~~Utilize jobframework setups~~ WIP: Utilize jobframework setups Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 22, 2024

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch 2 times, most recently from 9425583 to b60d7ed Compare January 22, 2024 12:45

tenzen-y changed the title ~~WIP: Utilize jobframework setups~~ Utilize jobframework setups Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 22, 2024

tenzen-y changed the title ~~Utilize jobframework setups~~ WIP: Utilize jobframework setups Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 22, 2024

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch 3 times, most recently from bfedab3 to 5d17773 Compare January 22, 2024 13:36

tenzen-y changed the title ~~WIP: Utilize jobframework setups~~ Utilize jobframework setups Jan 22, 2024

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 22, 2024

mimowo reviewed Jan 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch from 26f0985 to e823204 Compare January 22, 2024 18:37

k8s-ci-robot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 22, 2024

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch from e823204 to 67ef390 Compare January 22, 2024 18:53

k8s-ci-robot assigned alculquicondor and mimowo Jan 23, 2024

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch 2 times, most recently from 1d86f51 to eefbe1e Compare January 23, 2024 17:34

alculquicondor reviewed Jan 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch from 13ffe8c to 27ab24f Compare January 23, 2024 21:13

tenzen-y mentioned this pull request Jan 24, 2024

Add the integrationOptions to jobframework.Options #1637

Merged

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch 4 times, most recently from f519b21 to 8c31eff Compare January 24, 2024 18:10

Utilize jobframework setups

78acd53

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

tenzen-y force-pushed the utilize-jobframework-setup branch from 8c31eff to 78acd53 Compare January 24, 2024 18:16

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 24, 2024

alculquicondor reviewed Jan 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

tenzen-y added 4 commits January 25, 2024 04:37

Use WaitForCertsReady function in main setupControllers

79547e2

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

Add a comment how/when use the utilized functions

7205f12

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

Rename jobframework.go with setup.go

2762ecd

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

No wait for certs get ready inside the SetupControlers

4ab6b5f

Signed-off-by: tenzen-y <[email protected]>

alculquicondor reviewed Jan 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 24, 2024

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 93de69a into kubernetes-sigs:main Jan 24, 2024
14 checks passed

k8s-ci-robot added this to the v0.6 milestone Jan 24, 2024

tenzen-y deleted the utilize-jobframework-setup branch January 24, 2024 21:35

mimowo mentioned this pull request Feb 7, 2024

Utilize and expose functions for starting up the manager #1601

Open

	func IsWaitForPodsReadyEnable(cfg *configapi.Configuration) bool {
	func IsWaitForPodsReadyEnabled(cfg *configapi.Configuration) bool {

	jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(config.IsWaitForPodsReadyEnabled(cfg.WaitForPodsReady)),
	jobframework.WithWaitForPodsReady(cfg.WaitForPodsReady),

	// The controllers won't work until the webhooks are operating, and the webhook won't work until the
	// certs are all in place.
	setupLog.Info("Waiting for certificate generation to complete")
	<-certsReady
	setupLog.Info("Certs ready")

Utilize jobframework setups #1630

Utilize jobframework setups #1630

Conversation

tenzen-y commented Jan 22, 2024

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 22, 2024

netlify bot commented Jan 22, 2024 • edited Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-kueue canceled.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mimowo commented Jan 23, 2024

tenzen-y commented Jan 23, 2024

tenzen-y commented Jan 23, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tenzen-y commented Jan 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tenzen-y commented Jan 24, 2024 • edited Loading

tenzen-y commented Jan 24, 2024

alculquicondor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 24, 2024

netlify bot commented Jan 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

tenzen-y commented Jan 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading