-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
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
switch kube subnet manager to PATCH #681
Conversation
This means we're now using a newer version of go and arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc instead of arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc Also, switch to an alpine base image for amd64
61ed91c
to
0ef5b19
Compare
/cc @diegs |
This LGTM but I haven't tested it. |
return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to create patch for node %q: %v", ksm.nodeName, err) | ||
} | ||
|
||
_, err = ksm.client.Core().Nodes().Patch(ksm.nodeName, api.StrategicMergePatchType, patchBytes, "status") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What does providing the "status" subresource do/mean?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@aaronlevy it's a subresource under node that only allows updates to .status fields and annotations. It's less privileged then the node resource and can be acl'd seperately. This code was written pre-rbac and I'm trying to reduce the privilege required by kube-flannel.
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/pkg/registry/core/node/strategy.go#L122 status strategy zeros out changes to spec.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also see changes to rbac file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ah k. sgtm
I tested this by hand on friday. We should probably merge this, cut a release then consider merging #677. |
The changes themselves LGTM to me then. |
(more hand testing is always appreciated) |
Also hand-tested this one: launched a node using |
This works too.
@aaronlevy