Skip to content

Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue #1513

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2020
Merged

Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue #1513

merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2020

Conversation

njhale
Copy link
Member

@njhale njhale commented May 12, 2020

Description of the change:

  • Use a single GC queue for notifying CSVs of changes to resources that affect them
  • Requeue events all-namespace queues if registered

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: njhale

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 12, 2020
@njhale
Copy link
Member Author

njhale commented May 13, 2020

/retest

@njhale njhale changed the title fix(queues): use a single gc queue Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue May 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels May 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@njhale: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1834136, 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
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.5.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.5.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue

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.

njhale
njhale commented May 13, 2020
View reviewed changes
pkg/controller/operators/olm/operator.go
}

webhookSelector := labels.SelectorFromSet(ownerutil.OwnerLabel(clusterServiceVersion, v1alpha1.ClusterServiceVersionKind)).String()
mWebhooks, err := a.opClient.KubernetesInterface().AdmissionregistrationV1().MutatingWebhookConfigurations().List(context.TODO(), metav1.ListOptions{LabelSelector: webhookSelector})
if err != nil {
logger.WithError(err).Warn("cannot list MutatingWebhookConfigurations")
}
for _, webhook := range mWebhooks.Items {
syncError := a.objGCQueueSet.RequeueEvent("", kubestate.NewResourceEvent(kubestate.ResourceUpdated, &webhook))
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I'm not mistaken, the value of webhook was changing underneath the pointer since it's a free variable in the loop's body.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great catch!

@awgreene
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 13, 2020
@awgreene
Copy link
Member

/hold
Waiting for @dinhxuanvu or @ecordell to get a second set of eyes on this.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 13, 2020
ecordell
ecordell reviewed May 13, 2020
View reviewed changes
pkg/controller/operators/olm/operator.go Outdated
for _, webhook := range mWebhooks.Items {
syncError := a.objGCQueueSet.RequeueEvent("", kubestate.NewResourceEvent(kubestate.ResourceUpdated, &webhook))
logger.Debugf("handleCSVdeletion - requeued update event for %v, res=%v", webhook, syncError)
for i := 0; i < len(mWebhooks.Items); i++ {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

you can still keep the range, just make sure to do w := webhook in the loop body

pkg/lib/queueinformer/resourcequeue.go
@@ -39,6 +39,11 @@ func (r *ResourceQueueSet) RequeueEvent(namespace string, resourceEvent kubestat
r.mutex.RLock()
defer r.mutex.RUnlock()

if queue, ok := r.queueSet[metav1.NamespaceAll]; len(r.queueSet) == 1 && ok {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is this necessary? if "" is passed as the namespace, the following block will requeue in the "allnamespace" queue

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

because we also want all of the requeues that specifically mention a namespace to go to the all-namespace queue as well.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 13, 2020
@njhale njhale changed the title Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue WIP Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue May 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-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 May 13, 2020
@njhale njhale changed the title WIP Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue May 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-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 May 13, 2020
@njhale
Copy link
Member Author

njhale commented May 13, 2020

/retest

@ecordell
Copy link
Member

/hold
/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 15, 2020
@ecordell
Copy link
Member

/hold cancel

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

23 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 06e192f into operator-framework:master May 17, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@njhale: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: operator-framework/operator-lifecycle-manager#1513. Bugzilla bug 1834136 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1834136: fix(queues): use a single gc queue

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.

@njhale
Copy link
Member Author

njhale commented May 18, 2020

/cherry-pick release-4.4

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@njhale: #1513 failed to apply on top of branch "release-4.4":

error: Failed to merge in the changes.
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M	pkg/controller/operators/olm/operator.go
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging pkg/controller/operators/olm/operator.go
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in pkg/controller/operators/olm/operator.go
Patch failed at 0001 fix(queues): requeue events against all-namespace queue if present

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.4

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.

@njhale njhale mentioned this pull request May 18, 2020
Merged
@njhale njhale deleted the fix-qset branch July 23, 2021 02:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ecordell ecordell ecordell left review comments

@awgreene awgreene awgreene left review comments

@dinhxuanvu dinhxuanvu Awaiting requested review from dinhxuanvu

Assignees

@ecordell ecordell

@awgreene awgreene

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@njhale @openshift-ci-robot @awgreene @ecordell @openshift-bot @openshift-cherrypick-robot @openshift-merge-robot