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

🌱 KCP: remove code handling Kubernetes <= v1.21 #11146

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2024
Merged

🌱 KCP: remove code handling Kubernetes <= v1.21 #11146

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2024

Conversation

sbueringer
Copy link
Member

Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer buringerst@vmware.com

What this PR does / why we need it:

While implementing #11137 we noticed some code in KCP that was only required for Kubernetes <= 1.21.

The min supported Kubernetes version of CAPI v1.9 will be v1.26, so dropping this now to reduce complexity

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Part of #8190

@sbueringer
KCP: remove code handling Kubernetes <= v1.21
b63a4ab 
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer buringerst@vmware.com
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test ?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Sep 6, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sbueringer: The following commands are available to trigger required jobs:

  • /test pull-cluster-api-build-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-blocking-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-ci-latest-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-latestk8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-mink8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-upgrade-1-31-1-32-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-test-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-test-mink8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-verify-main

The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:

  • /test pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main

Use /test all to run the following jobs that were automatically triggered:

  • pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main
  • pull-cluster-api-build-main
  • pull-cluster-api-e2e-blocking-main
  • pull-cluster-api-test-main
  • pull-cluster-api-verify-main

In response to this:

/test ?

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-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/needs-area PR is missing an area label size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 6, 2024
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @chrischdi @fabriziopandini

neolit123
neolit123 reviewed Sep 6, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

controlplane/kubeadm/internal/workload_cluster.go
if err != nil {
return errors.Wrapf(err, "unable to extract %q from Kubelet ConfigMap's %q", cgroupDriverKey, cm.Name)
}
data, ok := cm.Data[kubeletConfigKey]
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 Sep 6, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wondering if the cgroup driver override can be removed at this point.
existing clusters were already mutated by this code, while for new clusters kubeadm does the defaulting.

it might be safer to do this once:
https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/7e1c131dc50fa84caa5e99da2b8bf67db32054ab/keps/sig-node/4033-group-driver-detection-over-cri/kep.yaml
goes GA.

however CRs need to adapt it first too.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added it to #8190 (to consider this later)

@sbueringer sbueringer added the area/provider/control-plane-kubeadm Issues or PRs related to KCP label Sep 6, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed do-not-merge/needs-area PR is missing an area label labels Sep 6, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 21b0c3b9b32aadc78473a17f28790b93bbdd0bd1

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test ?

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sbueringer: The following commands are available to trigger required jobs:

  • /test pull-cluster-api-build-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-blocking-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-ci-latest-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-latestk8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-mink8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-e2e-upgrade-1-31-1-32-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-test-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-test-mink8s-main
  • /test pull-cluster-api-verify-main

The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:

  • /test pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main

Use /test all to run the following jobs that were automatically triggered:

  • pull-cluster-api-apidiff-main
  • pull-cluster-api-build-main
  • pull-cluster-api-e2e-blocking-main
  • pull-cluster-api-test-main
  • pull-cluster-api-verify-main

In response to this:

/test ?

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-sigs/prow repository.

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-ci-latest-main
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-conformance-main
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-latestk8s-main
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-mink8s-main
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-upgrade-1-31-1-32-main

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

Pretty sure that these are independent (and known) flakes

/retest

fabriziopandini
fabriziopandini reviewed Sep 6, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice cleanup!
/lgtm

BTW, I think we should start tracking deprecation stuff in a more efficient way, e.g.

  • open tracking issues about things to deprecate when a CAPI version/a Kubernetes version/API version goes out of support
  • might be add TODOs with a sort of naming convention so we can start searching across the codebase, e.g. TODO: Remove-After-K8s1.21 EOS

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/retest

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member Author

@fabriziopandini @chrischdi @neolit123 Ready to merge?

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 10, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 8df788d into kubernetes-sigs:main Sep 10, 2024
29 checks passed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.9 milestone Sep 10, 2024
@sbueringer sbueringer deleted the pr-kcp-remove branch September 10, 2024 09:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left review comments

@neolit123 neolit123 neolit123 left review comments

@g-gaston g-gaston Awaiting requested review from g-gaston

@jackfrancis jackfrancis Awaiting requested review from jackfrancis

Assignees

@neolit123 neolit123

@chrischdi chrischdi

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/provider/control-plane-kubeadm Issues or PRs related to KCP cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.9
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@sbueringer @k8s-ci-robot @fabriziopandini @neolit123 @chrischdi