fix(vi): validate VirtualImage storage class
#852
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hardcoretime
force-pushed
the
fix/vi/validate-vi-storageclass
branch
19 times, most recently
from
1a24522 to
bdbb8dc
Compare
hardcoretime
requested review from
universal-itengineer,
nevermarine,
Isteb4k,
yaroslavborbat and
fl64
as code owners
Signed-off-by: Roman Sysoev <roman.sysoev@flant.com>
hardcoretime
force-pushed
the
fix/vi/validate-vi-storageclass
branch
from
bdbb8dc to
eb2917a
Compare
Isteb4k
requested changes
Mar 14, 2025
| @@ -114,3 +131,36 @@ func (v *Validator) ValidateDelete(_ context.Context, _ runtime.Object) (admissi | |||
| v.logger.Error("Ensure the correctness of ValidatingWebhookConfiguration", "err", err) | |||
| return nil, nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (v *Validator) validateStorageClass(ctx context.Context, vi *virtv2.VirtualImage) (admission.Warnings, error) { | |||
| if vi.Spec.PersistentVolumeClaim != (virtv2.VirtualImagePersistentVolumeClaim{}) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why did you decide not to check vi.Spec.Storage if vi.Spec.PersistentVolumeClaim is empty?
| @@ -114,3 +131,36 @@ func (v *Validator) ValidateDelete(_ context.Context, _ runtime.Object) (admissi | |||
| v.logger.Error("Ensure the correctness of ValidatingWebhookConfiguration", "err", err) | |||
| return nil, nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (v *Validator) validateStorageClass(ctx context.Context, vi *virtv2.VirtualImage) (admission.Warnings, error) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We want to check and prevent the creation of images not only for the storage class from the spec but also for default storage classes. This way, the user won't wait unnecessarily for an image that will never be created. Or was this check intentionally not added?
| if len(scProfile.Status.ClaimPropertySets) == 0 { | ||
| return reconcile.Result{}, fmt.Errorf("failed to validate the `PersistentVolumeMode` of the `StorageProfile`: %s", sc.Name) | ||
| } | ||
| if *scProfile.Status.ClaimPropertySets[0].VolumeMode == corev1.PersistentVolumeFilesystem { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add the test case to ensure that the condition will be false if the storage class is not ReadWriteMany and Block.
images/virtualization-artifact/pkg/controller/moduleconfig/moduleconfig_webhook.go
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
A temporary solution until the problem with
PersistentVolumeModeis resolved.Why do we need it, and what problem does it solve?
This is currently required to prevent a
VirtualImagefrom being created with thePersistentVolumeFilesystemstorage class.What is the expected result?
VirtualImagecannot be created thePersistentVolumeFilesystemstorage class.Checklist
Changelog entries