Skip to content

always overwrite TargetVolumeAttributesClassName when setting Status #510

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 29, 2025
Merged

always overwrite TargetVolumeAttributesClassName when setting Status #510

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 29, 2025
+7 −6

Conversation

huww98
Copy link
Contributor

@huww98 huww98 commented Jul 19, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup
/kind api-change

Uncomment only one /kind <> line, hit enter to put that in a new line, and remove leading whitespaces from that line:

/kind api-change
/kind bug
/kind cleanup
/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:

So it will be clear which VAC the status is describing.

Specifically, we now set target for Pending status to indicate which VAC we are waiting for.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

TargetVolumeAttributesClassName is now valid for Pending status

@huww98
always overwrite TargetVolumeAttributesClassName when setting Status
6c8c10f 
So it will be clear which VAC the status is describing.

Specifically, we now set target for Pending status to indicate which VAC we are waiting for.
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API labels Jul 19, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jul 19, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @huww98. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-csi 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 k8s-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 19, 2025
@gnufied
Copy link
Contributor

gnufied commented Jul 20, 2025

/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 Jul 20, 2025
@gnufied
Copy link
Contributor

gnufied commented Jul 20, 2025

This looks okay to me. What do you think @sunnylovestiramisu @AndrewSirenko ?

@gnufied
Copy link
Contributor

gnufied commented Jul 21, 2025

/assign @sunnylovestiramisu @AndrewSirenko

AndrewSirenko
AndrewSirenko reviewed Jul 22, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@AndrewSirenko AndrewSirenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@gnufied I agree this is cleaner user experience.

Took a quick look through places where we compare targetVAC and I don't think this changes behavior.

@gnufied
Copy link
Contributor

gnufied commented Jul 22, 2025

Adding my approval. I will let @AndrewSirenko or @sunnylovestiramisu lgtm this.

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gnufied, huww98

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

The pull request process is described 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 the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 22, 2025
sunnylovestiramisu
sunnylovestiramisu reviewed Jul 23, 2025
View reviewed changes
pkg/modifycontroller/modify_volume_test.go
{
name: "vac does not exist, no modification and set ModifyVolumeStatus to pending",
pvc: createTestPVC(pvcName, targetVac /*vacName*/, testVac /*curVacName*/, testVac /*targetVacName*/),
pvc: createTestPVC(pvcName, targetVac /*vacName*/, testVac /*curVacName*/, "" /*targetVacName*/),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the base pvc needs to change targetVacName to empty string?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that is to just check if code is working as expected. If base PVC already had target set, then we won't be able to tell the difference.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Then we should have a separate unit test case?

@sunnylovestiramisu
Copy link
Contributor

Looking at the diagram here, this change should be fine and not breaking other existing logic.

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 29, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit f28f38b into kubernetes-csi:master Jul 29, 2025
6 checks passed
@huww98 huww98 mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2025
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gnufied gnufied gnufied left review comments

@sunnylovestiramisu sunnylovestiramisu sunnylovestiramisu left review comments

@andyzhangx andyzhangx Awaiting requested review from andyzhangx

@jingxu97 jingxu97 Awaiting requested review from jingxu97

+1 more reviewer

@AndrewSirenko AndrewSirenko AndrewSirenko left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees

@AndrewSirenko AndrewSirenko

@sunnylovestiramisu sunnylovestiramisu

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. 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
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@huww98 @k8s-ci-robot @gnufied @sunnylovestiramisu @AndrewSirenko