Added PodLifecycleSleepActionAllowZero to sig-node-presubmit jobs

[sreeram-venkitesh]

This PR adds the e2e test for PodLifecycleSleepActionAllowZero to sig-node-presubmit jobs. This is based on @HirazawaUi's PR #33687 based on this comment: kubernetes/kubernetes#130621 (comment).

@HirazawaUi Please take a look!

[HirazawaUi]

/lgtm

[HirazawaUi]

/assign @kannon92
for approval

[kannon92]

I think this is using deprecated kubernetetes_e2e.py. Can you update this using kubetest2?

[kannon92]

/hold

Please try to use kubetest2 for this.

#32567

[sreeram-venkitesh]

@kannon92 Can you please review 74f5b1f? I referred another job in the same file which uses kubetest2 for making this change.

[kannon92]

What kind of test is this? e2e or e2e_node?

I see that you picked crio for this one and I'm not sure if that is intendend.

[sreeram-venkitesh]

This is an e2e test (It comes under e2e/common/node/lifecycle_hook.go). I'm going through sig-node-presubmit.yaml now and all the test are e2e_node ones I'm guessing? Sorry for the confusion, this is my first time doing this.

[kannon92]

We could try it!

Please change the image config to use cgroup v2 and I'll approve.

There are other containerd examples for kubetest2 also but if crio works then I think it is fine.

[sreeram-venkitesh]

Thanks I've updated it! I would like to try running this job locally once before merging it though. I can do this tomorrow and update here. I can also try with both containerd and crio if that works. What do you think?

[kannon92]

@sreeram-venkitesh have you coordinated with @AxeZhan on this?

You are adding a test for your sub feature but do we have testing for the PodLifecycleSleepAction? We could just add this job to that one?

[sreeram-venkitesh]

@kannon92 I could find this PR from @AxeZhan where the feature gate is added to the pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-cos-alpha-features job. Would a similar change be enough in this case?

[kannon92]

AFAIK kubernetes/kubernetes#128046 was added to try and graduate this feature.

The test flaked as it was not yet added to a periodic

I think you could add your test to that existing job.

[AxeZhan]

It would be good to take PodLifecycleSleepAction with this.

[AxeZhan]

I think you could add your test to that existing job.

By existing job, do you mean the periodic one got reverted or?

[sreeram-venkitesh]

I think you could add your test to that existing job.

By existing job, do you mean the periodic one got reverted or?

I had the same question! To confirm, is the only change required in config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-cloud-provider/gcp/gcp-gce.yaml, where we add PodLifecycleSleepActionAllowZero to the pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-cos-alpha-features job like so?

- - --test_args=--ginkgo.focus=\[Feature:(WatchList|InPlacePodVerticalScaling|APIServerTracing|SidecarContainers|StorageVersionAPI|PodPreset|ClusterTrustBundle|ClusterTrustBundleProjection|PodLifecycleSleepAction)\] --ginkgo.skip=\[Feature:(SCTPConnectivity|Volumes|Networking-Performance)\]|IPv6|csi-hostpath-v0|\[KubeUp\] --minStartupPods=8
+ - --test_args=--ginkgo.focus=\[Feature:(WatchList|InPlacePodVerticalScaling|APIServerTracing|SidecarContainers|StorageVersionAPI|PodPreset|ClusterTrustBundle|ClusterTrustBundleProjection|PodLifecycleSleepAction|PodLifecycleSleepActionAllowZero)\] --ginkgo.skip=\[Feature:(SCTPConnectivity|Volumes|Networking-Performance)\]|IPv6|csi-hostpath-v0|\[KubeUp\] --minStartupPods=8

Or should I keep the new job that I've added in this PR and add PodLifecycleSleepAction also to it as commented by @AxeZhan above?

[kannon92]

I think its up to you as the feature authors.

You will be the one monitoring and fixing these if issues arise.

Adding to an existing presubmit makes sense.

https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-node-cri-o#ci-crio-cgroupv2-node-e2e-features and the containerd one run the PodLifecycleSleepAction in CI already.

[sreeram-venkitesh]

I'm fine with having the test run along with the PodLifecycleSleepAction one.

https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-node-cri-o#ci-crio-cgroupv2-node-e2e-features and the containerd one run the PodLifecycleSleepAction in CI already.

For this would this change be enough? 8af7fde. If yes, I will clean up the rest of the commits in the PR.

[sreeram-venkitesh]

I'm fine with having the test run along with the PodLifecycleSleepAction one.

I've removed the new job that I've added and have added the feature gate to pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-cos-alpha-featuressimilar to what @AxeZhan did in #31959. I've also removed the feature gate skip from ci-crio-cgroupv2-node-e2e-features. Is this everything we need to make the e2e tests run in CI for our requiements for beta? Thanks!

[kannon92]

Thanks for following up on this.

I don’t think you removed that skip from all relevant jobs.

I see https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-node-cri-o#ci-crio-cgroupv1-node-e2e-features and I think we also have some presubmits for these feature jobs which may need to be updated.

im fine with this as a follow up though.

/lgtm
/approve

you may need other approves for this.

[pacoxu]

/approve
/assign @andrewsykim @cheftako

[ffromani]

/hold cancel

per @kannon92 further comments it seems to me the hold no longer applies

[mrunalp]

Can we clean up the commits here?

[kannon92]

/hold cancel

per @kannon92 further comments it seems to me the hold no longer applies

I gave my approval for node but I don't have rights for cloud provider.

[sreeram-venkitesh]

@mrunalp I've squashed all the commits.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kannon92, mrunalp, pacoxu, sreeram-venkitesh
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from andrewsykim. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-cloud-provider/OWNERS
• config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-node/OWNERS [kannon92,mrunalp]

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

[sreeram-venkitesh]

We can merge this now that kubernetes/kubernetes#130621 has been merged.

[kannon92]

We can merge this now that kubernetes/kubernetes#130621 has been merged.

@andrewsykim @cheftako

can you please give your blessing?