Skip to content

OCPBUGS-57887: Update to Kubernetes v1.31.10 #2348

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

Open
wants to merge 20 commits into
base: release-4.18
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

atiratree
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

k8s-release-robot and others added 20 commits May 15, 2025 09:32
When using an old runtime like containerd 1.7, this message is not
implemented and what we get here is an empty non-nil slice. Let's check
the len of the slice instead.

While we are there, let's just return false and no error. In the
following commits we will wrap the error and we didn't find any more
info to add here.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
This makes it clear the error comes due to a user namespace
configuration. Otherwise the error returned looks too generic and is not
clear.

Before this PR, the error was:

	  Warning  FailedCreatePodSandBox  1s    kubelet            Failed to create pod sandbox: the handler "" is not known

Now it is:

	  Warning  FailedCreatePodSandBox  1s    kubelet            Failed to create pod sandbox: runtime does not support user namespaces

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
Most errors where already wrapped, but these were missing.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
This reverts commit fd06dcd.

The revert is not to make it a hard error again, this revert is needed
to revert cleanly the commit that added this as an error in the first
place.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
…ort feature"

This reverts commit 8597b34.

I wrote in the Kubernetes documentation:

	In practice this means you need at least Linux 6.3, as tmpfs started
	supporting idmap mounts in that version. This is usually needed as
	several Kubernetes features use tmpfs (the service account token that is
	mounted by default uses a tmpfs, Secrets use a tmpfs, etc.)

The check is wrong for several reasons:
	* Pods can use userns before 6.3, they will just need to be
	  careful to not use a tmpfs (like a serviceaccount). MOST users
	  will probably need 6.3, but it is possible to use earlier kernel
	  versions. 5.19 probably works fine and with improvements in
          the runtime 5.12 can probably be supported too.
	* Several distros backport changes and the recommended way is
	  usually to try the syscall instead of testing kernel versions.
	  I expect support for simple fs like tmpfs will be backported
	  in several distros, but with this check it can generate confusion.
	* Today a clear error is shown when the pod is created, so it's
	  unlikely a user will not understand why it fails.
	* Returning an error if utilkernel fails to understand what
	  kernel version is running is also too strict (as we are
	  logging a warning even if it is not the expected version)
	* We are switching to enabled by default, which will log a
	  warning on every user that runs on an older than 6.3 kernel,
	  adding noise to the logs.

For there reasons, let's just remove the hardcoded kernel version check.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
I needed to wrap the error for debugging, let's just keep this as it is
useful.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
We don't build these tests for Windows, let's remove this skip.

We should have never added that skip, we should have skipped the entire
suite on Windows.

Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Campos <[email protected]>
[release-1.31] [go] Bump images, dependencies and versions to go 1.23.9 and distroless iptables
…of-#130800-upstream-release-1.31

Automated cherry pick of kubernetes#130800: Fix unit tests on windows
…of-#131623-upstream-release-1.31

Automated cherry pick of kubernetes#131623: kubelet: userns: Improve errors returned to the user
…of-#130243-upstream-release-1.31

Automated cherry pick of kubernetes#130243: Revert userns kernel check
[release-1.31] [go] Bump images, dependencies and versions to go 1.23.10 and distroless iptables
Kubernetes official release v1.31.10
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added backports/unvalidated-commits Indicates that not all commits come to merged upstream PRs. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jun 26, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@atiratree: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-57887, which is invalid:

  • release note text must be set and not match the template OR release note type must be set to "Release Note Not Required". For more information you can reference the OpenShift Bug Process.
  • expected Jira Issue OCPBUGS-57887 to depend on a bug targeting a version in 4.19.0, 4.19.z and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENT RELEASE), CLOSED (DONE), CLOSED (DONE-ERRATA), but no dependents were found

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@atiratree: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from p0lyn0mial and rphillips June 26, 2025 18:43
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the vendor-update Touching vendor dir or related files label Jun 26, 2025
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 26, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: atiratree
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign deads2k for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

@atiratree
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@atiratree
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 30, 2025

@atiratree: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backports/unvalidated-commits Indicates that not all commits come to merged upstream PRs. jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. vendor-update Touching vendor dir or related files
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants