-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
Bug 2016228: Use arguments to configure pprof-secret #208
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
Bug 2016228: Use arguments to configure pprof-secret #208
Conversation
Problem: The secret used to establish a secure connection with OLM's pprof endpoint is hardcoded to the openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace. This cannot work if OLM is not running in that namespace, as is the case on HyperShift clusters. Solutions: Allow users to configure the namespace for the pprof credentials secret.
@awgreene: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2016228, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: awgreene 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 |
/bugzilla refresh |
@awgreene: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2016228, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
/bugzilla refresh |
@awgreene: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2016228, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
/retest |
/lgtm |
/retest-required Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
2 similar comments
/retest-required Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest-required Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/bugzilla refresh |
@awgreene: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2016228, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
/retest-required Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
/retest-required Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
@awgreene: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 2016228 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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. |
/label qe-approved |
/cherry-pick release-4.9 |
@awgreene: new pull request created: #212 In response to this:
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. |
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
…openshift#208) Upstream-repository: api Upstream-commit: bfa93d1e8c6e0bcc792a85cab5fb8f3086727834
Problem: The secret used to establish a secure connection with
OLM's pprof endpoint is hardcoded to the
openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace. This cannot work
if OLM is not running in that namespace, as is the case on
HyperShift clusters.
Solutions: Allow users to configure the namespace for the pprof
credentials secret.