CNV-47438: ipam, virt: graduate persistent ips feature gate to GA

[maiqueb]

This PR graduates the PersistentIPsForVirtualization feature gate to GA.

[openshift-ci]

Hello @maiqueb! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: maiqueb
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign spadgett for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[maiqueb]

/test verify

[openshift-ci]

@maiqueb: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial	8717515	link	true	/test e2e-aws-serial
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial-techpreview	8717515	link	true	/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview
ci/prow/minor-e2e-upgrade-minor	8717515	link	true	/test minor-e2e-upgrade-minor
ci/prow/verify	8717515	link	true	/test verify

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.

[maiqueb]

@JoelSpeed o/

We have added periodic lanes to trigger the test for this feature gate in this PR, which we plan on GAing for 4.18.

The tests are quite thorough, and were added in this other PR.

Unfortunately, while the tests themselves pass, it seems the monitor tests fail constantly due to the monitor tests. We have been trying to get this sorted out, but everytime we look, another component of OpenShift Virt throws a new event / alarm / fails to adhere to conformance testing - OpenShift virt uses their own conformance testing framework, and the hypershift lanes we have in origin do not run monitor tests afaiu.

This is a list of items we have gone through in the last weeks:

• openshift/origin@9bb5aa1 (ignored virt alerts)
• virt: Skip operator unhealthy alarm origin#29305 (another virt alert to be ignored ...)
• events: Remove duplicated 'Available' events kubevirt/cluster-network-addons-operator#1922 (Remove duplicated 'Available' events from CNAO)
• Reduce frequency of Route management events kubevirt/containerized-data-importer#3490 (Reduce frequency of Route management events)
• Reduce frequency of SCC management Events kubevirt/containerized-data-importer#3477 (Reduce frequency of SCC management Events)
• Reset kubevirt_hco_system_health_status on update kubevirt/hyperconverged-cluster-operator#3170 (kubevirt_hco_system_health_status old error/warning values with different reasons still show after conditions are updated)
• Fix OperatorConditionsUnhealthy alert expression metric value kubevirt/hyperconverged-cluster-operator#3181 (Fix OperatorConditionsUnhealthy alert expression metric value; we "alerted" the cluster was healthy)

As a result, we plan on having the OpenShift Virt QE manually sign-off the feature is stable enough.

This is a heads-up so you know our intentions. Do you foresee any issues with this path ?

How does the process look like for the QE signoff ? Just setting qe-approved label ? Who overrides the failing verify lane ?

[JoelSpeed]

Looking at prow I can only see two runs of the periodics you've added, that, doesn't seem right?

Both have failed and seem to be complaining that there are no tests to run?

We normally ask to see test results in sippy, could you see if you can find any test data in sippy for the tests you've added? TRT may be able to help you if you can't work this out

[JoelSpeed]

Unfortunately, while the tests themselves pass, it seems the monitor tests fail constantly due to the monitor tests.

I can't see any evidence of this, please link

[maiqueb]

Unfortunately, while the tests themselves pass, it seems the monitor tests fail constantly due to the monitor tests.

I can't see any evidence of this, please link

Surely; if you open the Tests Passed in the periodic 4.18 execution and search for PersistentIPsForVirtualization you'll see all of them have passed.

[maiqueb]

Looking at prow I can only see two runs of the periodics you've added, that, doesn't seem right?

Both have failed and seem to be complaining that there are no tests to run?

I'd say this is on 4.19, where I am running the cluster without TP feature set.

We normally ask to see test results in sippy, could you see if you can find any test data in sippy for the tests you've added? TRT may be able to help you if you can't work this out

[JoelSpeed]

Surely; if you open the Tests Passed in the periodic 4.18 execution and search for PersistentIPsForVirtualization you'll see all of them have passed.

Ahh I see now, right, so these tests are passing, but don't show up in sippy, which means we can't actually track or visualise them. I've started some threads in slack in #forum-ocp-release-oversight. I'd like to understand why this isn't in sippy, once we have it in sippy, we can visualise your tests, and, looking at the results, it may actually satisfy the requirements to pass the verify naturally

[maiqueb]

Surely; if you open the Tests Passed in the periodic 4.18 execution and search for PersistentIPsForVirtualization you'll see all of them have passed.

Ahh I see now, right, so these tests are passing, but don't show up in sippy, which means we can't actually track or visualise them. I've started some threads in slack in #forum-ocp-release-oversight. I'd like to understand why this isn't in sippy, once we have it in sippy, we can visualise your tests, and, looking at the results, it may actually satisfy the requirements to pass the verify naturally

Oh nice. Hopefully :D

[openshift-ci-robot]

@maiqueb: This pull request references CNV-47438 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

This PR graduates the PersistentIPsForVirtualization feature gate to GA.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[maiqueb]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@maiqueb: This pull request references CNV-47438 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.