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.

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

csi: bump csi snapshotter image to v5 #9652

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

sathieu
Copy link
Contributor

@sathieu sathieu commented Jan 26, 2022

Description of your changes:

Bump csi snapshotter image to v5.0.1.

Breaking changes (from 5.0.1 release notes:

Replaces many VolumeSnapshot/VolumeSnapshotContent Update/UpdateStatus operations with Patch. This lowers the probability of the "object has been modified" update API errors occurring. This change introduces a dependency on two new RBAC rules for the CSI snapshotter sidecar: volumesnapshotcontents:patch, volumesnapshotcontents/status:patch and four new RBAC rules for the snapshot-controller: volumesnapshotcontents:patch, volumesnapshotcontents/status:patch, volumesnapshots:patch, and volumesnapshots/status: patch. (kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter#526, @ggriffiths)

There is also:

Rename KUBE_NODE_NAME to NODE_NAME for CSI snapshotter sidecar deployment. (kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter#616, @zhucan)

Which issue is resolved by this Pull Request:
Resolves #

Checklist:

  • Commit Message Formatting: Commit titles and messages follow guidelines in the developer guide.
  • Skip Tests for Docs: Add the flag for skipping the build if this is only a documentation change. See here for the flag.
  • Skip Unrelated Tests: Add a flag to run tests for a specific storage provider. See test options.
  • Reviewed the developer guide on Submitting a Pull Request
  • Documentation has been updated, if necessary.
  • Unit tests have been added, if necessary.
  • Integration tests have been added, if necessary.
  • Pending release notes updated with breaking and/or notable changes, if necessary.
  • Upgrade from previous release is tested and upgrade user guide is updated, if necessary.
  • Code generation (make codegen) has been run to update object specifications, if necessary.

@travisn travisn requested a review from Madhu-1 January 26, 2022 15:02
@sathieu sathieu force-pushed the csi_snapshotter_v5 branch from 2e4dff6 to fa02d9e Compare January 26, 2022 16:38
Copy link
Member

@Madhu-1 Madhu-1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Signed-off-by: Mathieu Parent <mathieu.parent@insee.fr>
@sathieu sathieu force-pushed the csi_snapshotter_v5 branch from fa02d9e to c57416b Compare January 27, 2022 07:00
@sathieu sathieu requested a review from Madhu-1 January 27, 2022 07:00
@sathieu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sathieu commented Jan 27, 2022

@Madhu-1 Requested changes done. Back to you!

@Madhu-1
Copy link
Member

Madhu-1 commented Jan 27, 2022

git diff
changes found by 'make gen-rbac'. please run 'make gen-rbac' locally and update your PR
M deploy/examples/common.yaml

@sathieu CI failure https://github.com/rook/rook/runs/4962590767?check_suite_focus=true can you please check

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ import (
const (
// snapshotterVersion from which the snapshotcontroller and CRD will be
// installed
snapshotterVersion = "v4.0.0"
snapshotterVersion = "v5.0.1"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

earlier snapshotter was getting deployed in the default namespace, after 4.0.0 its getting deployed in kube-system namespace, I think this change is still not enough we might need to do a string replace to replace kube-system with default or change

namespace := "default"
to kube-system

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, otherwise based on the rook/snapshot sidecar version we can make the change.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sathieu as you are away and we need this fix on priority I send #9665 added you as co-author.

@mergify
Copy link

mergify bot commented Jan 27, 2022

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be merged. @sathieu please rebase it. https://rook.io/docs/rook/latest/development-flow.html#updating-your-fork

@sathieu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sathieu commented Jan 28, 2022

Thanks @Madhu-1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants