🐛 Add MachinesUpToDate condition handling in MachinePool controller by ramessesii2 · Pull Request #13234 · kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api

ramessesii2 · 2026-01-14T11:27:44Z

What this PR does / why we need it:
MachinePool lacks clear status signal during upgrades. When spec.version changes (generation increments), status.observedGeneration updates immediately to match, but Ready/InfrastructureReady conditions only flip to False ~10s later. See the linked Github issue for more details.

Following the pattern established in MachineDeployment, this PR adds a MachinesUpToDate condition to MachinePool that provides an immediate, reliable signal for upgrade status:

For MachinePools with Machine objects: Aggregates MachineUpToDateCondition from individual Machines
For managed MachinePools (like AKS): Derives the condition from InfrastructureProvisioned status
10-second grace period: Filters out very new Machines to prevent condition flickering

See the new condition in the MachinePool status

status:
  availableReplicas: 1
  conditions:
  - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T12:39:46Z"
    message: ""
    observedGeneration: 9
    reason: UpToDate
    status: "True"
    type: MachinesUpToDate
  - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T11:36:09Z"
    message: ""
    observedGeneration: 9
    reason: NotPaused
    status: "False"
    type: Paused
  deprecated:
    v1beta1:
      availableReplicas: 1
      conditions:
      - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T12:39:46Z"
        status: "True"
        type: Ready
      - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T11:36:09Z"
        status: "True"
        type: BootstrapReady
      - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T12:39:46Z"
        status: "True"
        type: InfrastructureReady
      - lastTransitionTime: "2026-01-14T11:45:50Z"
        status: "True"
        type: ReplicasReady
      readyReplicas: 1
  initialization:
    bootstrapDataSecretCreated: true
    infrastructureProvisioned: true
  nodeRefs:
  - apiVersion: v1
    kind: Node
    name: aks-pool2-34400930-vmss000000
    uid: 953a05d8-8b81-421e-bfca-4c500f3c0f68
  observedGeneration: 9
  phase: Running
  readyReplicas: 1
  replicas: 1
  upToDateReplicas: 1

Fixes #10059

/area machinepool

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-01-14T11:27:54Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

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

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

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

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-01-14T11:27:54Z

Hi @ramessesii2. 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.

Details

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.

bnallapeta · 2026-01-29T04:20:58Z

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go

+			conditions.Set(mp, metav1.Condition{
+				Type:    clusterv1.MachinesUpToDateCondition,
+				Status:  metav1.ConditionFalse,
+				Reason:  clusterv1.NotUpToDateReason,


instead of this, would suggest using MachinePool specific constant. I already see MachineDeploymentMachinesNotUpToDateReason and other existing. If something is not there, you can add a new constant to keep it consistent with others.

aha! Nice catch! But it looks like it's going to be a separate work as per https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api/blob/main/api/core/v1beta2/machinepool_types.go#L32-L65

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_test.go

bnallapeta

Minor comments. Looks good.

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go

richardcase · 2026-01-30T20:06:02Z

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go

+	if !hasMachinePoolMachines {
+		// Check if infrastructure is ready by looking at the initialization status
+		if mp.Status.Initialization.InfrastructureProvisioned == nil || !*mp.Status.Initialization.InfrastructureProvisioned {
+			conditions.Set(mp, metav1.Condition{


I wonder if its also worth adding a message to state that this pool is "machine less" and the infrastructure is not ready. Just to give more context.

That's a user-facing condition and so, isn't that a provider-specific implementation detail?
It might be useful for devs debugging the controller itself, but then they can go to logs as opposed to users going to the infrastructure resource when they see the infra not provisioned message.

In that case adding a log with a high verbosity level may help with the debugging then

Sounds good. Added the log!

richardcase · 2026-02-03T14:29:08Z

/ok-to-test

- Updated the updateStatus method to include the new condition - Added unit tests - Fixes 10059 Signed-off-by: Satyam Bhardwaj <sbhardwaj@mirantis.com>

bnallapeta · 2026-02-05T09:13:42Z

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-02-05T09:13:51Z

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: 942c1eb5fd09168e53e5dddeb3cb8d301e37ab11

richardcase · 2026-02-06T17:34:46Z

/lgtm

ramessesii2 · 2026-02-09T06:43:40Z

Need help getting this merged now that it has lgtm. cc @fabriziopandini

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/invalid-commit-message Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid commit message. area/machinepool Issues or PRs related to machinepools labels Jan 14, 2026

k8s-ci-robot requested review from Karthik-K-N and richardcase January 14, 2026 11:27

k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jan 14, 2026

k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Jan 14, 2026

ramessesii2 force-pushed the RAMESSES/fix-capi-10059 branch from 70ae825 to 0952e72 Compare January 14, 2026 11:28

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/invalid-commit-message Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid commit message. label Jan 14, 2026

bnallapeta reviewed Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go Show resolved Hide resolved

bnallapeta reviewed Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_status.go Show resolved Hide resolved

bnallapeta reviewed Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

internal/controllers/machinepool/machinepool_controller_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved

bnallapeta reviewed Jan 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

richardcase reviewed Jan 31, 2026

View reviewed changes

ramessesii2 force-pushed the RAMESSES/fix-capi-10059 branch from 0952e72 to adee449 Compare February 3, 2026 14:03

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 Feb 3, 2026

Add MachinesUpToDate condition handling in MachinePool controller

fd0e7eb

- Updated the updateStatus method to include the new condition - Added unit tests - Fixes 10059 Signed-off-by: Satyam Bhardwaj <sbhardwaj@mirantis.com>

ramessesii2 force-pushed the RAMESSES/fix-capi-10059 branch from adee449 to fd0e7eb Compare February 3, 2026 15:05

k8s-ci-robot assigned bnallapeta Feb 5, 2026

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 5, 2026

k8s-ci-robot assigned richardcase Feb 6, 2026

Conversation

ramessesii2 commented Jan 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

bnallapeta Jan 29, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ramessesii2 Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bnallapeta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

richardcase Jan 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ramessesii2 Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

richardcase Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ramessesii2 Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

richardcase commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

bnallapeta commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

richardcase commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

ramessesii2 commented Feb 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

ramessesii2 commented Jan 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading