Skip to content

Don't hardcode the network interface in the openshift_logging_mux role #6609

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

Conversation

nkinder
Copy link
Contributor

@nkinder nkinder commented Jan 4, 2018

The openshift_logging_mux role hardcodes the 'eth0' interface alias
for determining the IP address to use for incoming external client
connections. This will cause the playbook to fail with an undefined
variable error on systems where an 'eth0' interface does not exist.

This patch changes the default IP address for external connections
to use the 'ansible_default_ipv4' fact. It also allows this to be
overridden by a new 'openshift_logging_mux_external_address' variable.

The openshift_logging_mux role hardcodes the 'eth0' interface alias
for determining the IP address to use for incoming external client
connections.  This will cause the playbook to fail with an undefined
variable error on systems where an 'eth0' interface does not exist.

This patch changes the default IP address for external connections
to use the 'ansible_default_ipv4' fact.  It also allows this to be
overridden by a new 'openshift_logging_mux_external_address' variable.
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 4, 2018
@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link

Can one of the admins verify this patch?
I understand the following commands:

  • bot, add author to whitelist
  • bot, test pull request
  • bot, test pull request once

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Jan 4, 2018
@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

bot, test pull request

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

@sdodson will ansible_default_ipv4 always be defined by the time we get to the logging playbook?

@sdodson
Copy link
Member

sdodson commented Jan 4, 2018

@sdodson will ansible_default_ipv4 always be defined by the time we get to the logging playbook?

The only situation where it wouldn't be is if the host has no default interface, this is a built in ansible fact so it gets set the first time facts are gathered.

@nkinder
Copy link
Contributor Author

nkinder commented Jan 5, 2018

/retest

1 similar comment
@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@nkinder
Copy link
Contributor Author

nkinder commented Jan 5, 2018

/cherrypick release-3.8

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@nkinder: only openshift org members may request cherry picks. You can still do the cherry-pick manually.

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.8

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.

@nkinder
Copy link
Contributor Author

nkinder commented Jan 5, 2018

/cherrypick release-3.7

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@nkinder: only openshift org members may request cherry picks. You can still do the cherry-pick manually.

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.7

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.

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/cherrypick release-3.7

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@ewolinetz: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-3.7 in a new PR and assign it to you.

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.7

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.

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/cherrypick release-3.8

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@ewolinetz: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-3.8 in a new PR and assign it to you.

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.8

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.

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

conformance test error openshift/origin#17634
/retest

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

bot, retest this please

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 8, 2018
@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

bot, test pull request

@ashcrow
Copy link
Member

ashcrow commented Jan 9, 2018

bot, retest this please

@ashcrow
Copy link
Member

ashcrow commented Jan 9, 2018

@jlebon PTAL. Looks like the bot is not running for this specific PR yet it's blocking the ability to merge (as it should).

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

FWIW I looked through the internal CI execution queue and don't see it; debugging this stuff is a huge pain since there's many legs in the chain that can go wrong in bridging the webhooks to fedmsg to the internal message bus to the internal jenkins.

@ashcrow
Copy link
Member

ashcrow commented Jan 9, 2018

@cgwalters thanks for taking a look.

@sdodson this seems to be an outlier in that fedmsg or another piece of infra flaked and so it's not showing up. If you're OK with it I suggest the force merge as PRs before and after this are being tested as they should be with the atomic bot.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

bot, retest this please

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Jan 9, 2018

I think this may be because @nkinder is not in the openshift or projectatomic org, which automatically whitelists all members.

@jlebon
Copy link
Member

jlebon commented Jan 9, 2018

bot, add author to whitelist

@ashcrow
Copy link
Member

ashcrow commented Jan 9, 2018

@jlebon @ewolinetz already tried whitelisting and asking to retest.

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/test all [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@ashcrow
Copy link
Member

ashcrow commented Jan 10, 2018

@jlebon out of curiosity what changed? The bot's happy now but I don't see anything different via the comments.

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/test all [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Automatic merge from submit-queue.

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@nkinder: new pull request created: #6689

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.8

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.

@ewolinetz
Copy link
Contributor

/cherrypick release-3.7

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@ewolinetz: new pull request created: #6690

In response to this:

/cherrypick release-3.7

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.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@nkinder: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/openshift-jenkins/extended_conformance_install_crio 3c5539a link /test crio

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants