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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

salt: Remove metalk8s.volumes from highstate #3913

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2022
Merged

salt: Remove metalk8s.volumes from highstate #3913

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2022

Conversation

gdemonet
Copy link
Contributor

This was added to ensure loop devices backed by sparse files had an updated logic after upgrading (with systemd units).

The side-effect is that upgrading a system where device paths have changed (e.g. because of a reboot and different load order) can break, since running metalk8s_volumes.is_prepared on such devices will return False, and raise when we try to format them.

Since this is not needed anymore (the units will already exist), and can be added back in the future if required, it is safe to remove for now.

@gdemonet gdemonet added kind:bug Something isn't working topic:lifecycle Issues related to upgrade or downgrade of MetalK8s complexity:easy Something that requires less than a day to fix severity:medium Medium impact (usability) on live deployments topic:salt Everything related to SaltStack in our product labels Nov 16, 2022
@gdemonet gdemonet requested a review from a team as a code owner November 16, 2022 09:13
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Hello gdemonet,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Status report is not available.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/123.0
  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.10
  • development/2.11
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • one peer

Peer approvals must include at least 1 approval from the following list:

TeddyAndrieux
TeddyAndrieux previously approved these changes Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
@gdemonet
salt: Remove metalk8s.volumes from highstate
d9367fa 
This was added to ensure loop devices backed by sparse files had an
updated logic after upgrading (with systemd units).

The side-effect is that upgrading a system where device paths have
changed (e.g. because of a reboot and different load order) can break,
since running `metalk8s_volumes.is_prepared` on such devices will return
False, and raise when we try to format them.

Since this is not needed anymore (the units will already exist), and can
be added back in the future if required, it is safe to remove for now.
@gdemonet gdemonet force-pushed the bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate branch from 0a73287 to d9367fa Compare November 16, 2022 09:21
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

History mismatch

Merge commit #0a7328787ba004313ad79b28b69778c6159fb7b0 on the integration branch
w/124.1/bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate is merging a branch which is neither the current
branch bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate nor the development branch
development/124.1.

It is likely due to a rebase of the branch bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate and the
merge is not possible until all related w/* branches are deleted or updated.

Please use the reset command to have me reinitialize these branches.

@gdemonet
Copy link
Contributor Author

/reset

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Reset complete

I have successfully deleted this pull request's integration branches.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/123.0
  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.10
  • development/2.11
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 16, 2022

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • one peer

Peer approvals must include at least 1 approval from the following list:

@gdemonet
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 17, 2022

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch w/124.1/bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 17, 2022

In the queue

The changeset has received all authorizations and has been added to the
relevant queue(s). The queue(s) will be merged in the target development
branch(es) as soon as builds have passed.

The changeset will be merged in:

  • ✔️ development/124.0

  • ✔️ development/124.1

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/123.0
  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.10
  • development/2.11
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

There is no action required on your side. You will be notified here once
the changeset has been merged. In the unlikely event that the changeset
fails permanently on the queue, a member of the admin team will
contact you to help resolve the matter.

IMPORTANT

Please do not attempt to modify this pull request.

  • Any commit you add on the source branch will trigger a new cycle after the
    current queue is merged.
  • Any commit you add on one of the integration branches will be lost.

If you need this pull request to be removed from the queue, please contact a
member of the admin team now.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 18, 2022

I have successfully merged the changeset of this pull request
into targetted development branches:

  • ✔️ development/124.0

  • ✔️ development/124.1

The following branches have NOT changed:

  • development/123.0
  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.10
  • development/2.11
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

Please check the status of the associated issue None.

Goodbye gdemonet.

@bert-e bert-e merged commit d9367fa into development/124.0 Nov 18, 2022
@bert-e bert-e deleted the bugfix/dont-manage-volumes-in-highstate branch November 18, 2022 11:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@TeddyAndrieux TeddyAndrieux TeddyAndrieux approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
complexity:easy Something that requires less than a day to fix kind:bug Something isn't working severity:medium Medium impact (usability) on live deployments topic:lifecycle Issues related to upgrade or downgrade of MetalK8s topic:salt Everything related to SaltStack in our product
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@gdemonet @bert-e @TeddyAndrieux