Skip to content

Conversation

@Fricounet
Copy link

@Fricounet Fricounet commented Nov 6, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

GenerateAccessibilityRequirements tries to get the Node and CSINode objects but if they are missing (because they were deleted), then the provisioning will fail with ProvisioningNoChange which means that it will potentially be retried forever if the node never comes back because nothing is removing the selected-node annotation anymore. This commit makes it so that Not Found api errors are properly caught and when it's the case, ProvisioningReschedule is returned to tell the scheduler to try a new node. This matches the previous implementation in the external-provisioner lib (https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/sig-storage-lib-external-provisioner/pull/194/files#diff-3c5bb5f48211873c58fcba055dcae2ac7b1958969219e06e1508d76d485dace7L1496-L1498)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #1437

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Fixed infinite retry loop during provisioning if node was deleted in the meantime.

GenerateAccessibilityRequirements tries to get the Node and CSINode objects but if they are missing (because they were deleted), then the provisioning will fail with ProvisioningNoChange which means that it will potentially be retried forever if the node never comes back because nothing is removing the selected-node annotation anymore.
This commit makes it so that Not Found api errors are properly caught and when it's the case, ProvisioningReschedule is returned to tell the scheduler to try a new node.
This matches the previous implementation in the external-provisioner lib (https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/sig-storage-lib-external-provisioner/pull/194/files#diff-3c5bb5f48211873c58fcba055dcae2ac7b1958969219e06e1508d76d485dace7L1496-L1498)

Signed-off-by: Baptiste Girard-Carrabin <[email protected]>
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. 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 Nov 6, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @Fricounet!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot 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 Nov 6, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Fricounet. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a github.com 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-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Fricounet
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign jsafrane for approval. 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:

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 k8s-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. 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 Nov 6, 2025
@sunnylovestiramisu
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot 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 Nov 10, 2025
if err != nil {
if apierrors.IsNotFound(err) {
// The node or CSINode object can't be found, ask the scheduler for a reschedule
return nil, controller.ProvisioningReschedule, err
Copy link
Contributor

@sunnylovestiramisu sunnylovestiramisu Nov 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does the GenerateAccessibilityRequirements properly return NotFound error now?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Because if the cache still has the csinode info, the GenerateAccessibilityRequirements will not even return a NotFound error.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Under what condition the node never comes back will retry forever? Because if it is a long provisioning, the PV object will be eventually created or failed with a final error, so it should not be forever?

@sunnylovestiramisu
Copy link
Contributor

Did you test it end to end that the fix works as expected?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

PVC stuck in Pending when CSINode is deleted during provionning phase

3 participants