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

Update violations page info #91288

Conversation

kcarmichael08
Copy link
Contributor

@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 commented Mar 28, 2025

Version(s):
4.7+

Issue

Link to docs preview

QE review: ACS has no QE, approved by SME

  • QE has approved this change.

Additional information:

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 28, 2025
@ocpdocs-previewbot
Copy link

ocpdocs-previewbot commented Mar 28, 2025

🤖 Thu Apr 03 14:32:34 - Prow CI generated the docs preview:

https://91288--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-acs/latest/operating/respond-to-violations.html

@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 force-pushed the ROX-27693-violations-page-updates branch from c49fa08 to bfb37dc Compare April 2, 2025 13:42
*** Violations in the build and deploy stages for workloads that were removed or modified to be compliant
*** Manually resolved runtime violations
*** Violations in all stages that were generated before a policy exclusion was added
** *Attempted*: Displays violations for deployment actions that were attempted but blocked by a pre-check of {product-title-short} policies by the {product-title-short} admission controller. For example, the deployment action that was attempted would have triggered a violation if it had been allowed to succeed, but the policy enforcement behavior did not allow it to succeed.
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

blocked by evaluation of enforced policies

... but the admission controller enforcement did not allow the operation to be admitted to the cluster.

@fduthilleul
Copy link

LGTM

Copy link

@clickboo clickboo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One minor comment/change for your consideration, good to go. Thank you for fixing this!

@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 force-pushed the ROX-27693-violations-page-updates branch from bfb37dc to 1dc0457 Compare April 2, 2025 20:09
@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 added RHACS Label for RHACS related PRs that go in the rhacs-docs branch rhacs-docs-4.5 rhacs-docs-4.6 rhacs-docs-4.7 rhacs-docs-4.8 labels Apr 2, 2025
@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 added this to the Continuous Release milestone Apr 2, 2025
@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 added peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR and removed rhacs-docs-4.5 rhacs-docs-4.6 labels Apr 2, 2025
@sr1kar99
Copy link
Contributor

sr1kar99 commented Apr 3, 2025

/label peer-review-in-progress
/remove-label peer-review-needed

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added peer-review-in-progress Signifies that the peer review team is reviewing this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR labels Apr 3, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@sr1kar99 sr1kar99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left a few suggestions.

Requesting @snarayan-redhat for another round of peer review.
Thanks!

** To display the findings for platform components in {ocp}, select *Platform view*.
** To display the findings for application workloads and platform components simultaneously, select *Full view*.
. Optional: Choose the appropriate method to re-organize the information in the *Violations* page:
. Click the tab to view violations for the following categories:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
. Click the tab to view violations for the following categories:
. Click one of the following tabs to view violations by category:

To maintain consistency with other parts of the doc.

. Click the tab to view violations for the following categories:
** *User Workloads*: Displays violations for user-managed workloads.
** *Platform*: Displays violations for workloads used by {ocp} and layered services.
** *All violations*: Displays violations for user workload and platform components, and audit log violations for cluster resources.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
** *All violations*: Displays violations for user workload and platform components, and audit log violations for cluster resources.
** *All violations*: Displays violations for user workloads and the platform component. It also displays audit log violations for cluster resources.

** *User Workloads*: Displays violations for user-managed workloads.
** *Platform*: Displays violations for workloads used by {ocp} and layered services.
** *All violations*: Displays violations for user workload and platform components, and audit log violations for cluster resources.
. To view different types of violations, click one of the following tabs:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
. To view different types of violations, click one of the following tabs:
. Click one of the following tabs to view violations by type:

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@sr1kar99 The original sentence adheres to ISG.

** *Resolved*: Displays the following violations:
*** Violations in the build and deploy stages for workloads that were removed or modified to be compliant
*** Manually resolved runtime violations
*** Violations in all stages that were generated before a policy exclusion was added
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
*** Violations in all stages that were generated before a policy exclusion was added
*** Violations that were generated before a policy exclusion was added

I think "in all stages" is redundant.

*** Manually resolved runtime violations
*** Violations in all stages that were generated before a policy exclusion was added
** *Attempted*: Displays violations for deployment actions that were attempted but blocked by the evaluation of enforced policies. For example, the admission controller found that the attempted deployment action, such as a deployment create, update, or scale, would have triggered a violation. The admission controller enforcement then did not allow the operation to be admitted to the cluster.
. Optional: Choose the appropriate method to reorganize or filter information in the *Violations* page:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
. Optional: Choose the appropriate method to reorganize or filter information in the *Violations* page:
. Optional: Choose a method to reorganize or filter information on the *Violations* page:

*** Violations in the build and deploy stages for workloads that were removed or modified to be compliant
*** Manually resolved runtime violations
*** Violations in all stages that were generated before a policy exclusion was added
** *Attempted*: Displays violations for deployment actions that were attempted but blocked by the evaluation of enforced policies. For example, the admission controller found that the attempted deployment action, such as a deployment create, update, or scale, would have triggered a violation. The admission controller enforcement then did not allow the operation to be admitted to the cluster.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
** *Attempted*: Displays violations for deployment actions that were attempted but blocked by the evaluation of enforced policies. For example, the admission controller found that the attempted deployment action, such as a deployment create, update, or scale, would have triggered a violation. The admission controller enforcement then did not allow the operation to be admitted to the cluster.
** *Attempted*: Displays violations for deployment actions that were attempted but blocked by enforced policies. For example, if the admission controller detected that creating, updating, or scaling a deployment would trigger a violation, it prevents the operation from running in the cluster.

Feel free to disagree. :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good suggestion - am keeping the examples because I think there could be other actions that might trigger a violation other than these?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed! I was thinking that all the actions were mentioned. If there are more actions then the examples can be kept.

@snarayan-redhat snarayan-redhat added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-in-progress Signifies that the peer review team is reviewing this PR labels Apr 3, 2025
@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 force-pushed the ROX-27693-violations-page-updates branch from 1dc0457 to 65b76d2 Compare April 3, 2025 14:26
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Apr 3, 2025

@kcarmichael08: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@kcarmichael08 kcarmichael08 merged commit aac19e7 into openshift:rhacs-docs-main Apr 3, 2025
2 checks passed
@kcarmichael08
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick rhacs-docs-4.7

@kcarmichael08
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick rhacs-docs-4.8

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@kcarmichael08: new pull request created: #91591

In response to this:

/cherrypick rhacs-docs-4.7

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.

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@kcarmichael08: new pull request created: #91592

In response to this:

/cherrypick rhacs-docs-4.8

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR RHACS Label for RHACS related PRs that go in the rhacs-docs branch rhacs-docs-4.7 rhacs-docs-4.8 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.

7 participants