Use clusterctlv1.DeleteForMoveAnnotation on last systempool validation

[pkbhowmick]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
this PR fixed a bug in clusterctl move command
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Please confirm that if this PR changes any image versions, then that's the sole change this PR makes.

TODOs:

• squashed commits
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests

Release note:

N/A

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @pkbhowmick. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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/test-infra repository.

[pkbhowmick]

#2774 can be handled in a better way now as there is a move annotation available at capi. Ref: kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#8322

The annotation will be available in capi next release i.e. v1.5.0

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[nawazkh]

Hey @pkbhowmick , How is this PR coming along?

[pkbhowmick]

Hey @pkbhowmick , How is this PR coming along?

Hey @nawazkh, the PR needs CAPI v1.5, so waiting for #3707

[nawazkh]

Hey @pkbhowmick, I guess this PR is a "work in progress" state. If not, please feel free to remove the work-in-progress label.

[pkbhowmick]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[pkbhowmick]

Hi @nawazkh , this PR is ready for review/test

[Jont828]

Thanks for the contribution! Does anyone know if this is covered in an e2e test already (so we can validate that this is working)?

[mboersma]

/ok-to-test
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-capi-e2e

The CAPI tests that CAPZ runs include clusterctl move, so I think that will cover it:

Ensure API servers are stable before doing move @ 10/12/23 17:41:30.728
Moving the cluster to self hosted @ 10/12/23 17:41:40.73
Moving workload clusters @ 10/12/23 17:41:40.73
  INFO: clusterctl move --from-kubeconfig /root/.kube/config --to-kubeconfig /tmp/e2e-kubeconfig1923033913 --namespace self-hosted
  Oct 12 17:41:47.231: INFO: Waiting for the cluster to be reconciled after moving to self hosted
Waiting for cluster to enter the provisioned phase @ 10/12/23 17:41:47.299
PASSED! @ 10/12/23 17:42:07.474
Ensure API servers are stable before doing move @ 10/12/23 17:42:09.177
Moving the cluster back to bootstrap @ 10/12/23 17:42:19.182
Moving workload clusters @ 10/12/23 17:42:19.182
  INFO: clusterctl move --from-kubeconfig /tmp/e2e-kubeconfig1923033913 --to-kubeconfig /root/.kube/config --namespace self-hosted
  Oct 12 17:42:30.966: INFO: Waiting for the cluster to be reconciled after moving back to booststrap

I think there should also be a unit test case in azuremanagedmachinepool_webhook_test.go.

[mboersma]

I think that will cover it

Nope, I forgot this was just for AMMP, and I don't think the CAPI test is using a managed cluster. So AFAICT we don't have e2e coverage for this.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (ff21c16) 56.65% compared to head (cf10241) 56.64%.
Report is 98 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3426      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.65%   56.64%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         187      187              
  Lines       19139    19139              
==========================================
- Hits        10844    10842       -2     
- Misses       7666     7668       +2     
  Partials      629      629              

Files	Coverage Δ
api/v1beta1/azuremanagedmachinepool_webhook.go	84.29% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[mboersma]

Does the DeleteForMoveAnnotation supercede this entirely? Wouldn't we still want to check for both conditions?

[pkbhowmick]

Yes, we don't need this. Move annotation confirms that object is being deleted because of clusterctl move operation.

[Jont828]

/rename Use clusterctlv1.DeleteForMoveAnnotation on last systempool validation

[jackfrancis]

/assign @CecileRobertMichon

feel free to loop me in as well

[CecileRobertMichon]

/lgtm
/approve

Let's see if we can add a self-hosted AKS cluster test to validate move in e2e. Opened #4157.

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 6c0d11c3f371c9fb68dd07b8ef154418d48af433

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: CecileRobertMichon

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:

• OWNERS [CecileRobertMichon]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment