-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 605
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
MicroShift 4.15+ support with helm charts #745
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
85545c8
f1b03e4
4c7ccce
3b32151
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -10,9 +10,41 @@ rules: | |
- apiGroups: [""] | ||
resources: ["nodes"] | ||
verbs: ["get", "list", "watch"] | ||
{{- if .Capabilities.APIVersions.Has "security.openshift.io/v1/SecurityContextConstraints" }} | ||
- apiGroups: | ||
- security.openshift.io | ||
resourceNames: | ||
- privileged | ||
resources: | ||
- securitycontextconstraints | ||
verbs: | ||
- use | ||
{{- end }} | ||
{{- if and .Values.gfd.enabled .Values.nfd.enableNodeFeatureApi }} | ||
- apiGroups: ["nfd.k8s-sigs.io"] | ||
resources: ["nodefeatures"] | ||
verbs: ["get", "list", "watch", "create", "update"] | ||
{{- end }} | ||
{{- if .Capabilities.APIVersions.Has "security.openshift.io/v1/SecurityContextConstraints" }} | ||
--- | ||
apiVersion: rbac.authorization.k8s.io/v1 | ||
kind: Role | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Could we create a list consisting of I'm happy to do these as a follow-up. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. With MicroShift we do also need a
Apologies, but no sure if I do also visualize the need for the loop over a list of Could you please clarify a bit this point? |
||
metadata: | ||
name: {{ include "nvidia-device-plugin.fullname" . }}-role | ||
namespace: {{ include "nvidia-device-plugin.namespace" . }} | ||
labels: | ||
{{- include "nvidia-device-plugin.labels" . | nindent 4 }} | ||
rules: | ||
- apiGroups: [""] | ||
resources: ["nodes"] | ||
verbs: ["get", "list", "watch"] | ||
- apiGroups: | ||
- security.openshift.io | ||
resourceNames: | ||
- privileged | ||
resources: | ||
- securitycontextconstraints | ||
verbs: | ||
- use | ||
{{- end }} | ||
{{- end }} |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -149,4 +149,4 @@ mps: | |
# be created. This includes a daemon-specific /dev/shm and pipe and log | ||
# directories. | ||
# Pipe directories will be created at {{ mps.root }}/{{ .ResourceName }} | ||
root: "/run/nvidia/mps" | ||
root: "/run/nvidia/mps" | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This seems like an oversight due to the removal of the explicit value. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. sorry for this typo. at the end, better to remove this file from the PR. what do you think? |
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.
Does it make sense to shift this to a named template to use here and below? Not a blocker though.
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.
Hi @elezar, apologies for so late reply, I'm back to this thread.
Yes, it looks like a good approach to follow. Should we include as part of this PR? Or can I do it as a secondary one?