Enhancements: Promote Node OS/Arch labels to GA

[yujuhong]

Enhancement Description

• One-line enhancement description (can be used as a release note):

kubelet: OS and Arch information is now recorded in `kubernetes.io/os` and `kubernetes.io/arch` labels on Node objects. The previous labels (`beta.kubernetes.io/os` and `beta.kubernetes.io/arch`) are still recorded, but are deprecated and targeted for removal in 1.18.

• PRs:
  
  
  
  • [ ] https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/73333
  
  
• Primary contact (assignee): @yujuhong
• Responsible SIGs: Node
• Design proposal link: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-node/20190130-node-os-arch-labels.md
• Link to e2e and/or unit tests:
• Reviewer(s) - (for LGTM) recommend having 2+ reviewers (at least one from code-area OWNERS file) agreed to review. Reviewers from multiple companies preferred: @dchen1107 @liggitt
• Approver (likely from SIG/area to which enhancement belongs): @dchen1107 @smarterclayton
• Enhancement target (which target equals to which milestone):
  
  
  
  • Beta release target: 1.3
  
  
  • Stable release target: 1.14
  
  

[k8s-ci-robot]

@yujuhong: There are no sig labels on this issue. Please add a sig label.

A sig label can be added by either:

1. mentioning a sig: @kubernetes/sig-<group-name>-<group-suffix>
   e.g., @kubernetes/sig-contributor-experience-<group-suffix> to notify the contributor experience sig, OR

2. specifying the label manually: /sig <group-name>
   e.g., /sig scalability to apply the sig/scalability label

Note: Method 1 will trigger an email to the group. See the group list.
The <group-suffix> in method 1 has to be replaced with one of these: _bugs, feature-requests, pr-reviews, test-failures, proposals_

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.

[smarterclayton]

I can do api review for this.

[liggitt]

targeting stable for 1.14

[liggitt]

assigned clayton for api review

[spiffxp]

Adding tracked/yes label to reconcile against https://bit.ly/k8s114-enhancements
FYI @claurence @lachie83 @lledru @ameukam

[claurence]

@yujuhong are there any open PRs in k/k that need to be merged for this to be in 1.14? Code freeze is 3/7 and if the PRs are not able to merge by then this issue will be removed from the milestone.

[andrewsykim]

I would like to shadow API review for this :)

[thockin]

Way to pick the easy ones Clayton :)

On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 9:35 AM Andrew Sy Kim [e-mail]
wrote:

I would like to shadow API review for this :)

—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/793#issuecomment-464134575,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVEnHiFMlNwegcKWW2A80hwQZAiJKks5vNu_sgaJpZM4abVbD
.

[claurence]

@yujuhong looking over the KEP for this enhancement I don't see any testing plans - can someone help PR in testing plans for this enhancement? This information is helpful for knowing readiness of this feature for the release and is specifically useful for CI Signal.

If we don't have testing plans this enhancement will be at risk for being included in the 1.14 release

[yujuhong]

I've added unit tests in both the node controller (pending PR #74442) and the kubelet (#73333).
I am on the fence of whether an e2e test is needed. I can add one to check whether both beta and GA labels are applied to all nodes, but that'd only check if label will be applied for 1.13 and before kubelets.
Our existing test suites do not test the scenario of upgrade/downgrade + changing OS/arch for nodes, so those cases will not be tested.

@liggitt @derekwaynecarr @thockin, as reviewers of the KEP, do you think the individual component (unit) tests are sufficient?

[liggitt]

@liggitt @derekwaynecarr @thockin, as reviewers of the KEP, do you think the individual component (unit) tests are sufficient?

in my opinion, yes

[simplytunde]

Hey @yujuhong Just a friendly reminder we're looking for a PR against k/website (branch dev-1.14) due by Friday, March 1. It would be great if it's the start of the full documentation, but even a placeholder PR is acceptable. Let me know if you have any questions!

[claurence]

Thanks for PR-ing those tests @yujuhong - are there any additional open PRs in k/k that need to be merged for 1.14? Reminder that code freeze is March 7th

[jimangel]

@yujuhong @liggitt - do you have any PR's open for "update documentation and examples to the GA labels (noting which version the GA labels were added)" against the dev-1.14 k/website branch? The placeholder PR deadline was last friday and I did not see anything related. Thanks!

[yujuhong]

@jimangel sorry for the delay. I just opened up a PR https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/12976

[kacole2]

@yujuhong was this feature completed and adopted as stable for 1.14? If so, lets close out this issue and clear out the labels.