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

Deprecate scheduler AlgorithmSource from v1alpha2 ComponentConfig #87999

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2020

Conversation

damemi
Copy link
Contributor

@damemi damemi commented Feb 10, 2020

What type of PR is this?
/kind deprecation

What this PR does / why we need it:
Removes AlgorithmSource from the v1alpha2 scheduler config API. This field is no longer needed and its removal is the first step toward deprecating policy config in favor of CC.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part of #87526

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

AlgorithmSource is removed from v1alpha2 Scheduler ComponentConfig

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/785
- [Other doc]: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/87617

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/deprecation Categorizes issue or PR as related to a feature/enhancement marked for deprecation. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 10, 2020
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 10, 2020

/hold
right now I have only taken the steps to remove the field from the API and add the manual conversion and defaulting updates. Please check my conversion functions, as the v1alpha2->config conversion is basically just what was removed from defaults.go

Next commits will actually remove this field from functional code (if that's the goal right now)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 10, 2020
@damemi damemi force-pushed the deprecate-algo-source branch 2 times, most recently from 572a429 to e346b43 Compare February 11, 2020 17:51
@damemi damemi changed the title [wip] Deprecate scheduler AlgorithmSource from v1alpha2 ComponentConfig Deprecate scheduler AlgorithmSource from v1alpha2 ComponentConfig Feb 11, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Feb 11, 2020
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 11, 2020

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 11, 2020
"unsafe"
)

func Convert_v1alpha2_KubeSchedulerConfiguration_To_config_KubeSchedulerConfiguration(in *v1alpha2.KubeSchedulerConfiguration, out *config.KubeSchedulerConfiguration, s conversion.Scope) error {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you add unit tests for both functions?

pkg/scheduler/apis/config/v1alpha2/conversion.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/scheduler/apis/config/v1alpha2/conversion.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
}

func Convert_config_KubeSchedulerConfiguration_To_v1alpha2_KubeSchedulerConfiguration(in *config.KubeSchedulerConfiguration, out *v1alpha2.KubeSchedulerConfiguration, s conversion.Scope) error {
out.TypeMeta = in.TypeMeta
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why not use autoConvert_config_KubeSchedulerConfiguration_To_v1alpha2_KubeSchedulerConfiguration?

out.Plugins = nil
}
out.PluginConfig = *(*[]v1alpha2.PluginConfig)(unsafe.Pointer(&in.PluginConfig))
return nil
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This one is tricky, but I'm not sure if we should care.

Theoretically, if there is an AlgorithmSource in the internal configuration, we should obtain the diff that needs to be applied to Plugins and Pluginconfig. But this is only needed if someone tries to do something like v1alpha1->internal->v1alpha2.

This is something that can be done by passing --config in v1alpha1 and --write-config-to, which writes to v1alpha2 all the time.

Again, should we care? I would say it's not worth the effort.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

According to the API conventions, we need to be able to round-trip to older versions without losing any information (see item 4 in this list: https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/api_changes.md#on-compatibility)

So that brings up a good question, because like you suggested here we can just use the autoConvert function, but how do we handle roundtripping AlgorithmSource? We need to keep that info somewhere (like an annotation?), or we can just drop it once the Scheduler no longer supports AlgorithmSource.

And in this point, how can we get the information from AlgorithmSource that needs to be applied to Plugins and PluginConfig? If it's a configmap, I suppose we could read from that, but if it's a policy file that becomes tougher.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Better information more specific to deprecation here, but I'm still not clear. I think an annotation is the way it suggests? https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/deprecation-policy/#deprecating-parts-of-the-api

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Though, this api is only in alpha so it might not be relevant for us. I'm ok with just dropping the information too

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would expect the round-trip requirement to be specific to APIs in which multiple clients interact with different versions of the same resource (e.g. REST APIs).

API types used in config files are input-only, and have multiple producers but a single consumer (the component whose configuration they are driving)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think our policy doesn't cover it while alpha either way.

I think it's confusing at best to have config file formats that are like our api objects but have different rules. I don't have specific case in which they go wrong, though. But I expect the inconsistency will eventually be a problem, e.g. maybe people start making these into CRDs for some strange reason. Anyway, I don't have concerns for this particular change.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In general, these configuration types are not supposed to be outputted. If we could add some type of annotation in them such that no internal->versioned conversion code is auto-generated, that would be a win already.

@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
/*
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add conversion_test, but I'm happy to only have v1alpha2->internal

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/priority important-longterm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 11, 2020
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 11, 2020

/retest

@fejta-bot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

Copy link
Member

@ahg-g ahg-g left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve
/hold

if out.AlgorithmSource.Provider != pointer.StringPtr(v1alpha2.SchedulerDefaultProviderName) {
t.Errorf("expected AlgorithmProvider to be %+v, got %+v", v1alpha2.SchedulerDefaultProviderName, out.AlgorithmSource.Provider)
}
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add empty line at the end.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

And I believe you still need the exported function that calls the auto function. Just for it to compile.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 11, 2020
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 14, 2020

@alculquicondor no problem, sometimes you can't avoid that. Rebased, please check if I missed anything

)

func TestV1alpha2ToConfigKubeSchedulerConfigurationConversion(t *testing.T) {
cases := []struct {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: I don't think we expect more cases, so no need for the cases slice.

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 14, 2020
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

Friendly ping @lavalamp

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

@lavalamp PTAL

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

@damemi there are new conflicts from the scheduling profiles. Please rebase.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 25, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Feb 25, 2020
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

It looks like you need to run ./hack/update-codegen.sh again

This commit removes AlgorithmSource from the v1alpha2 scheduler ComponentConfig api.
It also creates the necessary manual conversion functions and updates defaulting to accept the change.
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/retest

@@ -39,9 +39,6 @@ const (
type KubeSchedulerConfiguration struct {
metav1.TypeMeta `json:",inline"`

// AlgorithmSource specifies the scheduler algorithm source.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Removing this will make alpha 1 and 2 not round-trippable. Which is ordinarily OK for alpha, but I thought you were relying on that for some of the other changes?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We only allow users to pass in one configuration (either v1alpha1 or v1alpha2). And then we use the internal types to build profiles.

We have a flag to write the configuration to a file and exit the scheduler. This only has debugging purposes (for kube-scheduler devs), but it would be broken with this change when using v1alpha1 (it only outputs in v1alpha2).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@lavalamp any additional concerns?

@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 25, 2020

/retest

1 similar comment
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor Author

damemi commented Feb 25, 2020

/retest

@lavalamp
Copy link
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahg-g, damemi, lavalamp

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 Feb 26, 2020
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 26, 2020
@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 09edbcd into kubernetes:master Feb 27, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.18 milestone Feb 27, 2020
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. 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/deprecation Categorizes issue or PR as related to a feature/enhancement marked for deprecation. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. 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.

7 participants