-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
OCPBUGS-69998: Updating ose-cloud-network-config-controller-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.22 #196
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
Created by ART pipeline job run https://art-jenkins.apps.prod-stable-spoke1-dc-iad2.itup.redhat.com/job/scheduled-builds/job/sync-ci-images/48106 |
b90e92f to
7b519bc
Compare
WalkthroughVersion bump of OpenShift container images from 4.21 to 4.22 in CI/CD configuration and Docker build files. Only image tag references are updated; no behavioral or logic changes. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
|
@openshift-bot: An error was encountered updating to the POST state for bug OCPBUGS-69998 on the Jira server at https://issues.redhat.com/. No known errors were detected, please see the full error message for details. Full error message.
Error marking step #38207298 finished: root cause: Tried to update an entity that does not exist.: request failed. Please analyze the request body for more details. Status code: 400:
Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with DetailsIn 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-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-69998, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn 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. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting
Knowledge base: Disabled due to Reviews -> Disable Knowledge Base setting
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
.ci-operator.yaml(1 hunks)Dockerfile(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**
⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file
-Focus on major issues impacting performance, readability, maintainability and security. Avoid nitpicks and avoid verbosity.
Files:
Dockerfile
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Dockerfile (2)
7-7: Base image version is correctly set to 4.22, consistent with the builder stage.Both the builder stage (line 1) and base stage (line 7) reference version 4.22. However, this is not a version bump from a prior state—the Dockerfile was added as part of the initial 4.22 release configuration.
Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
1-1: Builder images are consistent across Dockerfile and CI configuration.Both the builder stage (
rhel-9-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22) and runtime base image (4.22:base-rhel9) are aligned with the CI configuration (rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22), ensuring consistent OpenShift version targeting throughout the build pipeline.
| build_root_image: | ||
| name: release | ||
| namespace: openshift | ||
| tag: rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.21 | ||
| tag: rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
# First, let's understand the file structure and see if there are any git diffs available
git ls-files | head -20Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 498
🏁 Script executed:
# Check the current content and structure of .ci-operator.yaml
cat -n .ci-operator.yaml 2>/dev/null || echo "File not found at root"Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 218
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for .ci-operator.yaml in the repository
fd "ci-operator" --type fRepository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 67
🏁 Script executed:
# Look for Dockerfile to verify alignment claims
fd "Dockerfile" --type fRepository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 95
🏁 Script executed:
# Check git log for recent changes to understand the PR context
git log --oneline -10 2>/dev/null || echo "Git history not available"Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 342
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for references to version 4.21 and 4.22 in the codebase
rg "4\.2[12]" --type-list | head -20Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 474
🏁 Script executed:
# Let's see the git diff for .ci-operator.yaml to confirm the version change
git diff HEAD~1 HEAD .ci-operator.yaml 2>/dev/null || git show HEAD:.ci-operator.yaml 2>/dev/nullRepository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 190
🏁 Script executed:
# Check Dockerfile for golang version references
cat -n DockerfileRepository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 803
🏁 Script executed:
# Search for 4.21 and 4.22 references more carefully
rg "4\.21|4\.22"Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 245
🏁 Script executed:
# Check git diff more broadly to see what files changed
git diff --stat HEAD~1 HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo "Cannot get git diff"Repository: openshift/cloud-network-config-controller
Length of output: 104
Version bump is consistent with Dockerfile and ART alignment.
The build root image tag update to 4.22 aligns with the Dockerfile references on lines 1 and 7, which both use rhel-9-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22 and ocp/4.22:base-rhel9 respectively. The changes are consistent with the stated ART-driven 4.22 alignment objective per the commit message.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In .ci-operator.yaml around lines 1 to 4, ensure the build_root_image tag
matches the Dockerfile and ART alignment (Dockerfile uses
rhel-9-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22 and ocp/4.22:base-rhel9); if it already does,
no change is required, otherwise update the tag to
rhel-9-release-golang-1.24-openshift-4.22 to keep CI, Dockerfile, and ART
references consistent.
|
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-69998, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: DetailsIn 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. |
1 similar comment
|
@openshift-bot: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-69998, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: DetailsIn 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. |
|
/test okd-scos-images |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jluhrsen, openshift-bot The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@openshift-bot: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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. |
Updating ose-cloud-network-config-controller-container image to be consistent with ART for 4.22
TLDR:
Product builds by ART can be configured for different base and builder images than corresponding CI
builds. This automated PR requests a change to CI configuration to align with ART's configuration;
please take steps to merge it quickly or contact ART to coordinate changes.
The configuration in the following ART component metadata is driving this alignment request:
ose-cloud-network-config-controller.yml.
Detail:
This repository is out of sync with the downstream product builds for this component. The CI
configuration for at least one image differs from ART's expected product configuration. This should
be addressed to ensure that the component's CI testing accurate reflects what customers will
experience.
Most of these PRs are opened as an ART-driven proposal to migrate base image or builder(s) to a
different version, usually prior to GA. The intent is to effect changes in both configurations
simultaneously without breaking either CI or ART builds, so usually ART builds are configured to
consider CI as canonical and attempt to match CI config until the PR merges to align both. ART may
also configure changes in GA releases with CI remaining canonical for a brief grace period to enable
CI to succeed and the alignment PR to merge. In either case, ART configuration will be made
canonical at some point (typically at branch-cut before GA or release dev-cut after GA), so it is
important to align CI configuration as soon as possible.
PRs are also triggered when CI configuration changes without ART coordination, for instance to
change the number of builder images or to use a different golang version. These changes should be
coordinated with ART; whether ART configuration is canonical or not, preferably it would be updated
first to enable the changes to occur simultaneously in both CI and ART at the same time. This also
gives ART a chance to validate the intended changes first. For instance, ART compiles most
components with the Golang version being used by the control plane for a given OpenShift release.
Exceptions to this convention (i.e. you believe your component must be compiled with a Golang
version independent from the control plane) must be granted by the OpenShift staff engineers and
communicated to the ART team.
Roles & Responsibilities:
tests OR that necessary metadata changes are reported to the ART team:
@release-artistsin
#forum-ocp-arton Slack. If necessary, the changes required by this pull request can beintroduced with a separate PR opened by the component team. Once the repository is aligned,
this PR will be closed automatically.
verify-depsis complaining. In that case, please opena new PR with the dependency issues addressed (and base images bumped). ART-9595 for reference.
any required labels to ensure the PR merges once tests are passing. In cases where ART config is
canonical, downstream builds are already being built with these changes, and merging this PR
only improves the fidelity of our CI. In cases where ART config is not canonical, this provides
a grace period for the component team to align their CI with ART's configuration before it becomes
canonical in product builds.
ART has been configured to reconcile your CI build root image (see https://docs.ci.openshift.org/docs/architecture/ci-operator/#build-root-image).
In order for your upstream .ci-operator.yaml configuration to be honored, you must set the following in your openshift/release ci-operator configuration file:
Change behavior of future PRs:
set up automatically. This means that such a PR would merge without human intervention (and awareness!) in the future.
To do so, open a PR to set the
auto_labelattribute in the image configuration. ExampleUPSTREAM: <carry>:. An example.If you have any questions about this pull request, please reach out to
@release-artistsin the#forum-ocp-artcoreos slack channel.