Skip to content

[GEP-33] Fix default architecture when using capabilities #12745

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 19, 2025
Merged

[GEP-33] Fix default architecture when using capabilities #12745

merged 4 commits into from
Aug 19, 2025

Conversation

Roncossek
Copy link
Contributor

@Roncossek Roncossek commented Aug 14, 2025 •
edited by LucaBernstein
Loading

How to categorize this PR?

/area control-plane
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
When working with cloudprofiles that use capabilities and only one architecture is supported the following issues arise:

  • Cloudprofiles are rejected when no architecture capability is defined on a machineType. Rejection reason: "must provide an architecture" on spec.machineTypes[0].architecture
  • Shoots are rejected as no default image can be found for machineImages without a CapabilitySet.

Special notes for your reviewer:
When a cloudprofiles defines only one architecture. The architecture capability is not required on every machineType and machineImage in the cloudprofile. Only when multiple architectures are supported its required to be explicitly set.
@LucaBernstein @timuthy

Release note:

Fixed MachineImage and MachineType architecture defaulting for `CloudProfile`s supporting one architecture only.

@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot added area/control-plane Control plane related kind/bug Bug cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the cla-assistant.io CLA. labels Aug 14, 2025
@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot requested review from timebertt and timuthy August 14, 2025 14:34
@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 14, 2025
@Roncossek Roncossek force-pushed the fix/ArchitectureCapability branch from 53ff181 to 2e03e55 Compare August 14, 2025 14:55
@Roncossek Roncossek force-pushed the fix/ArchitectureCapability branch from 3eff8e2 to def30ec Compare August 14, 2025 17:32
@Roncossek Roncossek mentioned this pull request Aug 15, 2025
Open
@Roncossek Roncossek changed the title [GEP-33] FIx default architecture when using capabilities [GEP-33] Fix default architecture when using capabilities Aug 18, 2025
@timuthy
Copy link
Member

timuthy commented Aug 18, 2025

/assign

timuthy
timuthy reviewed Aug 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@timuthy timuthy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit :)

@Roncossek @timuthy
Update pkg/apis/core/v1beta1/types_cloudprofile.go
cfe384e 
Co-authored-by: Tim Usner <tim.usner@sap.com>
@gardener-prow Gardener Prow
Copy link
Contributor

gardener-prow bot commented Aug 18, 2025 •
edited
Loading

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

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
pull-gardener-apidiff cfe384e link false /test pull-gardener-apidiff

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Command help for this repository.
Please help us cut down on flakes by linking this test failure to an open flake report or filing a new flake report if you can't find an existing one. Also see our testing guideline for how to avoid and hunt flakes.

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.

@Roncossek
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest-required

timuthy
timuthy reviewed Aug 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@timuthy timuthy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 19, 2025
@gardener-prow Gardener Prow
Copy link
Contributor

gardener-prow bot commented Aug 19, 2025

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: cb64d439a751dc568f98ad912fbfe0314010d6b4

@gardener-prow Gardener Prow
Copy link
Contributor

gardener-prow bot commented Aug 19, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: timuthy

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

@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 19, 2025
@gardener-prow gardener-prow bot merged commit e10959b into gardener:master Aug 19, 2025
18 of 19 checks passed
Duciwuci pushed a commit to stackitcloud/gardener that referenced this pull request Sep 1, 2025
@Roncossek @timuthy @Duciwuci
[GEP-33] Fix default architecture when using capabilities (gardener#1…
aa22c51 
…2745)

* fix: pass cloudprofile default architecture when using capabilities on shoot admission and image selection

* fix architecture defaulting for machineTypes on capabilities cloudprofiles with one architecture

* pass capability definitions direktly to determine default architecture in helpter functions.

* Update pkg/apis/core/v1beta1/types_cloudprofile.go

Co-authored-by: Tim Usner <tim.usner@sap.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Tim Usner <tim.usner@sap.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@timuthy timuthy timuthy left review comments

@timebertt timebertt Awaiting requested review from timebertt

Assignees

@timuthy timuthy

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/control-plane Control plane related cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the cla-assistant.io CLA. kind/bug Bug lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@Roncossek @timuthy