Skip to content
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.

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

kubeadm: Fix omitempty in v1beta2 #77345

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 4, 2019

Conversation

rosti
Copy link
Contributor

@rosti rosti commented May 2, 2019

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

There are a couple of problems with regards to the omitempty in v1beta1:

  • It is not applied to certain fields. This makes emitting YAML configuration files in v1beta1 config format verbose by both kubeadm and third party Go lang tools. Certain fields, that were never given an explicit value would show up in the marshalled YAML document. This can cause confusion and even misconfiguration.

  • It can be used in inappropriate places. In this case it's used for fields, that need to be always serialized. The only one such field at the moment is NodeRegistrationOptions.Taints. If the Taints field is nil, then it's defaulted to a slice containing a single control plane node taint. If it's an empty slice, no taints are applied, thus, the cluster behaves differently. With that in mind, a Go program, that uses v1beta1 with omitempty on the Taints field has no way to specify an explicit empty slice of taints, as this would get lost after marshalling to YAML.

To fix these issues the following is done in this change:

  • A whole bunch of additional omitemptys are placed at many fields in v1beta2.
  • omitempty is removed from NodeRegistrationOptions.Taints
  • A test, that verifies the ability to specify empty slice value for Taints is included.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes kubernetes/kubeadm#1358
Refs kubernetes/enhancements#970 kubernetes/kubeadm#1439

Special notes for your reviewer:
/cc @kubernetes/sig-cluster-lifecycle-pr-reviews
/area kubeadm
/priority important-soon
/assign @fabriziopandini
/assign @timothysc
/assign @neolit123
/cc @dlipovetsky

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. label May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. area/kubeadm priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from dlipovetsky May 2, 2019 16:08
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rosti

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 May 2, 2019
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks @rosti
the diff LGTM.

There are a couple of problems with regards to the `omitempty` in v1beta1:

- It is not applied to certain fields. This makes emitting YAML configuration
  files in v1beta1 config format verbose by both kubeadm and third party Go
  lang tools. Certain fields, that were never given an explicit value would
  show up in the marshalled YAML document. This can cause confusion and even
  misconfiguration.

- It can be used in inappropriate places. In this case it's used for fields,
  that need to be always serialized. The only one such field at the moment is
  `NodeRegistrationOptions.Taints`. If the `Taints` field is nil, then it's
  defaulted to a slice containing a single control plane node taint. If it's
  an empty slice, no taints are applied, thus, the cluster behaves differently.
  With that in mind, a Go program, that uses v1beta1 with `omitempty` on the
  `Taints` field has no way to specify an explicit empty slice of taints, as
  this would get lost after marshalling to YAML.

To fix these issues the following is done in this change:

- A whole bunch of additional omitemptys are placed at many fields in v1beta2.
- `omitempty` is removed from `NodeRegistrationOptions.Taints`
- A test, that verifies the ability to specify empty slice value for `Taints`
  is included.

Signed-off-by: Rostislav M. Georgiev <rostislavg@vmware.com>
@rosti rosti force-pushed the omitempty-v1beta2 branch from 2210219 to 81e3adc Compare May 3, 2019 10:00
Copy link
Member

@dixudx dixudx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 4, 2019
@rosti
Copy link
Contributor Author

rosti commented May 4, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 0a83ed5 into kubernetes:master May 4, 2019
Copy link
Member

@luxas luxas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One unexpected change

@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ type NodeRegistrationOptions struct {
// Taints specifies the taints the Node API object should be registered with. If this field is unset, i.e. nil, in the `kubeadm init` process
// it will be defaulted to []v1.Taint{'node-role.kubernetes.io/master=""'}. If you don't want to taint your control-plane node, set this field to an
// empty slice, i.e. `taints: {}` in the YAML file. This field is solely used for Node registration.
Taints []v1.Taint `json:"taints,omitempty"`
Taints []v1.Taint `json:"taints"`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why remove omitempty here?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@luxas I think you may have missed the explanation in the PR description above. Here's an excerpt:

It can be used in inappropriate places. In this case it's used for fields, that need to be always serialized. The only one such field at the moment is NodeRegistrationOptions.Taints. If the Taints field is nil, then it's defaulted to a slice containing a single control plane node taint. If it's an empty slice, no taints are applied, thus, the cluster behaves differently. With that in mind, a Go program, that uses v1beta1 with omitempty on the Taints field has no way to specify an explicit empty slice of taints, as this would get lost after marshalling to YAML.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ah, ok, yeah I missed that 👍

@luxas
Copy link
Member

luxas commented May 8, 2019

Otherwise LGTM 👍

@rosti rosti mentioned this pull request Jun 10, 2019
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/kubeadm cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. 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. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Not possible to represent absence of Taints when marshalling kubeadm configuration
9 participants