feat: Native DaemonSet Progressive Delivery - Part 1: Core Infrastruc… by marcoma2018 · Pull Request #314 · openkruise/rollouts

marcoma2018 · 2025-10-15T11:42:55Z

Summary

This PR implements the first part of Native DaemonSet Progressive Delivery support. This foundational implementation enables progressive delivery for standard Kubernetes DaemonSets (apps/v1) within the Kruise Rollout framework, which focuses on the core controller logic, ControllerRevision discovery, and BatchRelease integration as defined in the proposal.

Implementation Details

1. Core Controller Infrastructure

New partition-style controller in pkg/controller/batchrelease/control/partitionstyle/nativedaemonset/
- Implements Initialize, UpgradeBatch, Finalize, CalculateBatchContext interface methods
- Manages OnDelete update strategy for controlled rollouts
- Handles batch upgrade logic with proper partition tracking

2. Workload Discovery and Parsing

Enhanced ControllerFinder in pkg/util/controller_finder.go
- Added native DaemonSet discovery and revision management
- Automatic identification of stable and canary revisions from ControllerRevision objects
- Annotation-based persistence of revision information
Workload parsing utilities in pkg/util/parse_utils.go
- Added ParseDaemonSet function for native DaemonSet workload parsing
- Support for extracting revision information and status from DaemonSet objects
Workload utilities in pkg/util/workloads_utils.go
- Added DaemonSet-specific helper functions for pod counting and revision matching
- Enhanced workload type detection and handling

3. BatchRelease Integration

Added native DaemonSet adaptation to existing BatchRelease workflow
- Updated batchrelease_controller.go, batchrelease_event_handler.go, andbatchrelease_executor.go to recognize and process native DaemonSet workloads
- Integrated DaemonSet support into the main reconciliation loop and execution logic

4. Rollout Controller Integration

Added native DaemonSet adaptation to existing Rollout framework
- Enhanced rollout_controller.go and rollout_status.go handling to support native DaemonSet workload references
- Integrated DaemonSet-specific status calculation and reporting into the rollout workflow

5. Webhook Mutation Support

Enhanced mutation webhook in pkg/webhook/workload/mutating/workload_update_handler.go
- Added handleNativeDaemonSet function for DaemonSet template change detection and integration with rollout progression workflow
- Automatic rollout annotation injection and OnDelete strategy enforcement
Updated webhook registration in pkg/webhook/workload/mutating/webhooks.go
- Added native DaemonSet to supported workload types

6. Configuration and Permissions

Updated RBAC in config/rbac/role.yaml
- Added permissions for DaemonSet and ControllerRevision resources
Enhanced webhook configuration in config/webhook/manifests.yaml
- Updated webhook rules to include DaemonSet resources
Added constants in pkg/util/constant.go
- DaemonSet-specific annotation keys and configuration constants

What's Next

This is Part 1 of 3 in the Native DaemonSet Progressive Delivery implementation:

Part 2: Advanced DaemonSet Controller (separate controller for pod deletion logic based on partition)
Part 3: Integration tests and end-to-end validation

…ture Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <marco.ma@sap.com>

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <marco.ma@sap.com>

codecov · 2025-10-15T13:01:08Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.97368% with 70 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 50.60%. Comparing base (787bb9c) to head (838b6b6).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...bhook/workload/mutating/workload_update_handler.go	39.02%	23 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pkg/util/controller_finder.go	74.35%	10 Missing and 10 partials ⚠️
.../control/partitionstyle/nativedaemonset/control.go	93.70%	5 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
...troller/batchrelease/batchrelease_event_handler.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
pkg/webhook/workload/mutating/webhooks.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...g/controller/batchrelease/batchrelease_executor.go	50.00%	2 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
pkg/util/rollout_utils.go	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
pkg/controller/rollout/rollout_status.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #314      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   47.99%   50.60%   +2.61%     
==========================================
  Files          63       64       +1     
  Lines        9841     8201    -1640     
==========================================
- Hits         4723     4150     -573     
+ Misses       4559     3478    -1081     
- Partials      559      573      +14

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`50.60% <76.97%> (+2.61%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <qingjin_ma@163.com>

furykerry · 2025-10-29T11:32:45Z

pkg/util/controller_finder.go

+		revision := &revisionList.Items[i]
+		// Check if this ControllerRevision is owned by the DaemonSet
+		if ref := metav1.GetControllerOf(revision); ref != nil {
+			if ref.Name == daemonSet.Name && ref.Kind == "DaemonSet" {


please also check the apiversion field of the reference. Alternatively, just check the uid of the ref ?

Good catch! You're right that we should validate the owner reference more strictly.
I'll update the code to check the UID directly, which is more reliable than checking
Name/Kind/APIVersion separately.

furykerry · 2025-10-29T11:41:03Z

pkg/util/controller_finder.go

 }

 func (r *ControllerFinder) getStatefulSetLikeWorkload(namespace string, ref *rolloutv1beta1.ObjectRef) (*Workload, error) {
+	ok, _ := verifyGroupKind(ref, ControllerKindSts.Kind, []string{ControllerKindSts.Group})


why add these logic ?

During testing, I discovered that getNativeDaemonSet was never being reached. After adding more logs, I found the reason is that because getStatefulSetLikeWorkload (earlier in the finder chain: return []ControllerFinderFunc{r.getKruiseCloneSet, r.getAdvancedDeployment, r.getStatefulSetLikeWorkload, r.getKruiseDaemonSet, r.getNativeDaemonSet}) was incorrectly entered due to missing validation. Adding these checks ensures each finder only matches its intended workload type, allowing all finders in the chain to function properly.

furykerry · 2025-10-29T11:48:40Z

pkg/webhook/workload/mutating/workload_update_handler.go

+	if newObj.Annotations == nil {
+		newObj.Annotations = map[string]string{}
+	}
+	newObj.Annotations[util.InRolloutProgressingAnnotation] = string(by)


shall we keep the original update strategy of daemonset in annotation

Good point! I initially thought DaemonSets wouldn't use OnDelete strategy in real scenarios, but that assumption was too optimistic. I'll add the logic to store the strategy type in the annotation to ensure we can properly restore it later.

furykerry · 2025-10-29T11:53:01Z

pkg/controller/batchrelease/control/partitionstyle/nativedaemonset/control.go

+	// if batchPartition == nil, workload should be promoted to use the original update strategy
+	if release.Spec.ReleasePlan.BatchPartition == nil {
+		updateStrategy := apps.DaemonSetUpdateStrategy{
+			Type: apps.RollingUpdateDaemonSetStrategyType,


what if the original update strategy is already OnDelete?

Same as above. The logic will be changed to restore update strategy by annotation.

zmberg · 2025-10-29T12:19:49Z

/lgtm

marcoma2018 · 2025-10-29T12:46:07Z

@furykerry I'll address these two improvements: UID for owner reference and update strategy on annotation in my next PR.

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <qingjin_ma@163.com>

furykerry

/lgtm
/approve

kruise-bot · 2025-10-30T07:50:42Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: furykerry

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [furykerry]

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

feat: Native DaemonSet Progressive Delivery - Part 1: Core Infrastruc…

627f2ad

…ture Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <marco.ma@sap.com>

kruise-bot requested review from FillZpp and veophi October 15, 2025 11:43

kruise-bot added the size/XXL label Oct 15, 2025

marcomasap added 2 commits October 15, 2025 19:57

tiny changes

06376cc

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <marco.ma@sap.com>

tiny changes

1937f1a

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <marco.ma@sap.com>

tiny changes

16dc10d

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <qingjin_ma@163.com>

furykerry reviewed Oct 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

kruise-bot assigned zmberg Oct 29, 2025

kruise-bot added the lgtm label Oct 29, 2025

apply reviews

34aa978

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <qingjin_ma@163.com>

kruise-bot removed the lgtm label Oct 29, 2025

apply reviews

838b6b6

Signed-off-by: Marco Ma <qingjin_ma@163.com>

furykerry approved these changes Oct 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

kruise-bot assigned furykerry Oct 30, 2025

kruise-bot added the lgtm label Oct 30, 2025

kruise-bot added the approved label Oct 30, 2025

kruise-bot merged commit 501d832 into openkruise:master Oct 30, 2025
34 checks passed

Conversation

marcoma2018 commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Implementation Details

1. Core Controller Infrastructure

2. Workload Discovery and Parsing

3. BatchRelease Integration

4. Rollout Controller Integration

5. Webhook Mutation Support

6. Configuration and Permissions

What's Next

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

zmberg commented Oct 29, 2025

Uh oh!

marcoma2018 commented Oct 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

furykerry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kruise-bot commented Oct 30, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

marcoma2018 commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

marcoma2018 commented Oct 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading