fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has … #758

fjding · 2023-05-10T02:55:18Z

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has not taken effect.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #757

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Fixed the suspend=true add to the job/mpijob by the default webhook has not taken effect.

netlify · 2023-05-10T02:55:26Z

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-kueue ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`a3e923c`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-sigs-kueue/deploys/645c664c8c53e10009f2f602
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-758--kubernetes-sigs-kueue.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-05-10T02:55:27Z

Hi @fjding. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

kannon92 · 2023-05-10T11:21:09Z

/ok-to-test

tenzen-y · 2023-05-10T12:01:03Z

@fjding Thanks for your contribution. Could you fix the MPIJob as well?

fjding · 2023-05-10T12:07:05Z

@fjding Thanks for your contribution. Could you fix the MPIJob as well?

Sorry, I missed it, I will re-update the pr

tenzen-y · 2023-05-10T12:10:34Z

pkg/controller/jobs/job/job_controller.go

 }

 func (j *Job) Object() client.Object {
-	return &j.Job
+	return j.Job


I think we should return a pointer here.

this is a pointer already

Ah, I found the receiver is a pointer. Thanks!

tenzen-y · 2023-05-10T12:13:56Z

pkg/controller/jobs/job/job_controller.go

@@ -121,11 +121,11 @@ func (h *parentWorkloadHandler) queueReconcileForChildJob(object client.Object,
 }

 type Job struct {
-	batchv1.Job
+	*batchv1.Job


Uhm... Instead of making this a pointer, adding a new function, SetObject(obj client.Object) might be better.
@alculquicondor @mimowo @kerthcet WDYT?

pointer sounds better

My understanding of func Object() was incorrect. So, a pointer sounds better.

alculquicondor · 2023-05-10T15:32:11Z

/kind bug
can you add a release note?

alculquicondor · 2023-05-10T15:32:52Z

tests are failing, could you investigate?

…not taken effect Signed-off-by: fjding <dingfangjie@bytedance.com>

fjding · 2023-05-11T03:54:46Z

/ok-to-test

fjding · 2023-05-11T05:39:30Z

tests are failing, could you investigate?

done

tenzen-y · 2023-05-11T06:03:31Z

@fjding This PR is related to a user-facing change. So instead of adding None to the release note, adding appropriate comments would be great.

tenzen-y

@fjding Thank you!
/lgtm

mimowo · 2023-05-11T08:11:29Z

/lgtm thanks for fixing.

Given the importance of the scenario I suggest we add an e2e test. Either in this or a follow up PR. WDYT @alculquicondor ?

tenzen-y · 2023-05-11T08:21:06Z

/lgtm thanks for fixing.

Given the importance of the scenario I suggest we add an e2e test. Either in this or a follow up PR. WDYT @alculquicondor ?

+1

alculquicondor · 2023-05-11T15:18:27Z

-1 on e2e, but we should have an integration test for this.

alculquicondor · 2023-05-11T15:20:43Z

@fjding could you add one integration test for job in this PR?

/lgtm
/approve

You can do it in a follow up, but ideally we cherry-pick that one too.

k8s-ci-robot · 2023-05-11T15:20:50Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, fjding

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [alculquicondor]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

alculquicondor · 2023-05-11T15:20:54Z

/cherry-pick release-0.3

k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot · 2023-05-11T15:20:55Z

@alculquicondor: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-0.3 in a new PR and assign it to you.

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-0.3

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/test-infra repository.

k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot · 2023-05-11T15:35:42Z

@alculquicondor: new pull request created: #765

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-0.3

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/test-infra repository.

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T15:05:04Z

we should have an integration test for this.

Through more investigation, I found that it is hard to test this scenario.

The job reconciler sets suspend=true even in the webhook doesn't set suspend=true.

kueue/pkg/controller/jobframework/reconciler.go

Lines 347 to 351 in 8733524

    
           // stopJob will suspend the job, and also restore node affinity, reset job status if needed. 
        
           func (r *JobReconciler) stopJob(ctx context.Context, job GenericJob, object client.Object, wl *kueue.Workload, eventMsg string) error { 
        
           	log := ctrl.LoggerFrom(ctx) 
        
           	// Suspend the job at first then we're able to update the scheduling directives. 
        
           	job.Suspend()

So, we should run the integration test only for webhook. But I'm not sure how to start the webhook server without a manager using the envtest.

@alculquicondor Any thoughts?

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T15:10:55Z

Maybe we must start a simple http server to start a webhook server without a manager.

testEnv := &envtest.Environment{}

hookServer := &webhook.Server{
  Port: testEnv.WebhookInstallOptions.LocalServingPort,
  Host: testEnv.WebhookInstallOptions.LocalServingHost,
}

httpServer := &http.Server{
  Addr:    hookServer.Address(),
  Handler: hookServer.ServeMux,
}
...

alculquicondor · 2023-05-12T15:49:38Z

I guess we would face the same problem with e2e tests. Maybe it's not worth doing this?

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T15:55:58Z

I guess we would face the same problem with e2e tests.

That's right.

Maybe it's not worth doing this?

As another approach, we can add a unit test for the

kueue/pkg/controller/jobframework/defaults.go

Line 16 in 8733524

func ApplyDefaultForSuspend(job GenericJob, manageJobsWithoutQueueName bool) {

WDYT? @alculquicondor

alculquicondor · 2023-05-12T15:59:51Z

That wouldn't help, because we where passing the wrong object to that function.

The unit test needs to be for the Job webhook function (and MPIJob), if there isn't one already.

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T16:04:36Z

That wouldn't help, because we where passing the wrong object to that function.

That makes sense.

The unit test needs to be for the Job webhook function (and MPIJob), if there isn't one already.

Yes, we don't have any unit tests for the Defaulter.

mimowo · 2023-05-12T16:04:54Z

I guess we would face the same problem with e2e tests.

I suggested e2e because I thought we have webhooks running there. This comment suggests that:

kueue/test/e2e/suite_test.go

Line 67 in 8733524

// To verify that webhooks are ready, let's create a simple resourceflavor

.

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T16:15:40Z

Uhm, adding a unit test for the Defaulter might be better.

alculquicondor · 2023-05-12T16:55:15Z

Yes, but the e2e test would have the same problem than this #758 (comment)

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T17:01:39Z

Yes, but the e2e test would have the same problem than this #758 (comment)

Yes, it would be hard to verify the Defaulter in E2E :(

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T17:19:41Z

In the integration test, as a hacky approach, we might be able to verify the Defaulter in the following:

Manually create a Workload with Admitted=true.
Create a Job with Active=1.

Although, I'm not sure whether the hacky test is worth it.

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T17:21:17Z

For e2e, I don't have any good ideas.

alculquicondor · 2023-05-12T18:26:45Z

not worth, IMO. unit tests at the webhook level should be enough

tenzen-y · 2023-05-12T18:29:38Z

not worth, IMO. unit tests at the webhook level should be enough

Agree. Let's go ahead :)

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels May 10, 2023

k8s-ci-robot requested review from ArangoGutierrez and tenzen-y May 10, 2023 02:55

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label May 10, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 10, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels May 10, 2023

tenzen-y reviewed May 10, 2023

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label May 10, 2023

fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has …

a3e923c

…not taken effect Signed-off-by: fjding <dingfangjie@bytedance.com>

fjding force-pushed the fix-suspend-invalid branch from 274779e to a3e923c Compare May 11, 2023 03:51

k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels May 11, 2023

tenzen-y reviewed May 11, 2023

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot assigned tenzen-y May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. labels May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot removed the release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. label May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot assigned alculquicondor May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 8733524 into kubernetes-sigs:main May 11, 2023

k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request May 11, 2023

[release-0.3] fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has … #765

Merged

alculquicondor mentioned this pull request May 11, 2023

Release v0.3.1 #766

Closed

14 tasks

tenzen-y mentioned this pull request May 12, 2023

Add the unit test for the jobframework Defaulter #769

Merged

fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has … #758

fix the suspend=true added to the job by the default job webhook has … #758

Conversation

fjding commented May 10, 2023 • edited Loading

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

netlify bot commented May 10, 2023 • edited Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-kueue ready!

k8s-ci-robot commented May 10, 2023

kannon92 commented May 10, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 10, 2023

fjding commented May 10, 2023

tenzen-y May 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alculquicondor May 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tenzen-y May 10, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tenzen-y May 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alculquicondor May 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tenzen-y May 10, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alculquicondor commented May 10, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 10, 2023

fjding commented May 11, 2023

fjding commented May 11, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 11, 2023

tenzen-y left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mimowo commented May 11, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 11, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 11, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 11, 2023

k8s-ci-robot commented May 11, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 11, 2023

k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot commented May 11, 2023

k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot commented May 11, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023 • edited Loading

mimowo commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

alculquicondor commented May 12, 2023

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023

fjding commented May 10, 2023 •

edited

Loading

netlify bot commented May 10, 2023 •

edited

Loading

tenzen-y May 10, 2023 •

edited

Loading

tenzen-y commented May 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading