[4.22] OCPBUGS-59514: redacted install config for baremetal#9972
[4.22] OCPBUGS-59514: redacted install config for baremetal#9972openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intoopenshift:mainfrom
Conversation
|
@iurygregory: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-59514, which is invalid:
Comment The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn response to this: 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. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@iurygregory: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-59514, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
2d85a68 to
2f70ace
Compare
patrickdillon
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/label backport-risk-assessed
Hm perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but could you simply do this:
case newConfig.BareMetal != nil:
for _, host := range newConfig.BareMetal.Hosts {
host.BMC.Password = "REDACTED"
}This way you would not need to update this code for future fields. Not sure why other platforms don't do this, so perhaps I am missing something!
|
@patrickdillon thanks for the feedback, let me push a change with your idea and test via cluster-bot! |
2f70ace to
749c837
Compare
|
It looks like another instance of this problem was already fixed by OCPBUGS-61353, but there is still one more that this doesn't solve. Clearly this is going to keep happening though. I don't feel like this is fixed until we have code that uses
I think the problem is that this changes the original install-config, meaning the redacted version will get written to the asset store. The InstallConfig struct is passed by value, so it is safe to overwrite the pullSecret at the top level, but it contains references to nested structs (Platform struct is embedded by value, but it contains pointers to the actual platform implementation), and only the references get copied. We need to either go through (a hopefully better version of) the same rigmarole as the other platforms or generate |
+1. I knew I was missing something and this point was exactly it. Ignore my suggestion! |
|
& apologies for misleading you @iurygregory |
1cb7810 to
5e4737a
Compare
Looks like you predicted #10025, Zane. This PR should make the whole copying much easier and individual overrides can be done just like Patrick's previous suggestion. |
Looks like a good scenarios to use Claude 😁 Current approach looks OK to me though resolve the issue today unless you want to wait for #10025, @iurygregory |
Hey @tthvo , I'll be waiting for #10025 to land so I can update things! |
Thanks @patrickdillon I will wait for #10025 to merge so I can update this one. |
|
@iurygregory #10025 is merged. You can use deepcopy now :D |
|
@tthvo thanks! going to update here |
|
/test ? |
|
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn e2e-vsphere-ovn e2e-nutanix-ovn |
|
@iurygregory could the unit tests be updated to cover vSphere and Nutanix? And then we should be OK using passing unit tests to add the verified label? |
|
@sadasu will update |
Assisted-By: Claude Code Sonnet 4 Signed-off-by: Iury Gregory Melo Ferreira <imelofer@redhat.com>
4b09c16 to
6e0e314
Compare
|
/retest-required |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@iurygregory: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-59514, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
/retest-required |
|
/verified later @jadhaj |
|
@jadhaj: This PR has been marked to be verified later by DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@iurygregory: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
/test artifacts-images |
|
|
@sadasu let me know if this address what you requested. Tks! |
|
/test okd-scos-images |
|
@patrickdillon can you take another look? Thanks! |
|
@patrickdillon @sadasu can you take another look at this? Tks! |
|
/lgtm |
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are limited based on label configuration. 🚫 Review skipped — only excluded labels are configured. (1)
Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
@iurygregory: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-59514: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: This pull request has the DetailsIn response to this: 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. |
No description provided.