Skip to content

Minimal MachinePool support #1506

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
Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Minimal MachinePool support #1506

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

justinsb
Copy link
Contributor

@justinsb justinsb commented Aug 16, 2025 •
edited
Loading

  • Initial spike: GCPMachinePool

  • GCPMachinePool: generated code/manifests

This continues the work started by @BrennenMM7 in #901 . I also combined in the support from cluster-api-provider-aws to see what we want to borrow from that, and will whittle the code we don't need from cluster-api-provider-aws away.


NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Aug 16, 2025
@netlify Netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Aug 16, 2025 •
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-gcp ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 87cedb8
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-gcp/deploys/68d9196c75f319000831c6ad
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-1506--kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-gcp.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Aug 16, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from cpanato August 16, 2025 14:33
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: justinsb

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from dims August 16, 2025 14:33
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 16, 2025
@justinsb
Copy link
Contributor Author

This PR is WIP while I whittle down the unneeded code from cluster-api-provider-aws and generally make this reviewable. But I am uploading as this is a checkpoint that works (in a limited way!)

@justinsb justinsb force-pushed the machinepool branch 5 times, most recently from 428790f to 5906e99 Compare August 16, 2025 19:42
@justinsb justinsb mentioned this pull request Aug 16, 2025
Merged
@justinsb justinsb changed the title WIP: Minimal MachinePool support Minimal MachinePool support Aug 23, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Aug 23, 2025
@justinsb
Copy link
Contributor Author

Removing the WIP. I will still try to whittle down the code by extracting helpers etc, but it's already approaching the reviewable ballpark!

@justinsb
Copy link
Contributor Author

So the linter is blowing up on the TODO comments. How do we want to track next steps in code? If we don't want to do // TODO because golangci, maybe we do // TASK?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Aug 23, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 29, 2025
@justinsb justinsb mentioned this pull request Sep 5, 2025
Merged
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 6, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 6, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 23, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 24, 2025
@justinsb justinsb force-pushed the machinepool branch 2 times, most recently from 3e5ccac to 23a3b82 Compare September 25, 2025 00:00
This was referenced Sep 25, 2025
Merged
Merged
@justinsb justinsb force-pushed the machinepool branch 5 times, most recently from dde318e to 3eea450 Compare September 26, 2025 17:21
@justinsb
Initial spike: GCPMachinePool
cbe6b07
@justinsb
GCPMachinePool: generated code/manifests
181c78f
@justinsb
MachinePool: populate providerIDList
87cedb8 
In order for nodes to be associated to the MachinePool, we need to populate the
spec.providerIDList field.  This field is known to the MachinePool controller.
@justinsb justinsb mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2025
Open
justinsb
justinsb commented Sep 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
config/rbac/role.yaml
resources:
- gcpmachinepools
verbs:
- delete
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is not folder into the same block as e.g. gcpmachines because we don't need create. I'm not sure that we need create on e.g. gcpclusters either, but ... that's a separate issue

justinsb
justinsb commented Sep 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
exp/controllers/gcpmachinepool_controller.go
}

// FUTURE: do we need to verify that the instances are actually running?
machinePoolScope.GCPMachinePool.Spec.ProviderIDList = providerIDList
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I really don't like this very much (it shouldn't be spec, it requires us to poll the cloud API), but it seems to be the MachinePool contract.

@justinsb
Copy link
Contributor Author

So I think I finally have this working with an e2e test in #1539 and (hopefully) in a mergeable state.

The big thing for the e2e test was populating spec.providerIDList. I don't love that contract, but it is the MachinePool contract.

@justinsb justinsb mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2025
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@cpanato cpanato Awaiting requested review from cpanato

@dims dims Awaiting requested review from dims

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@justinsb @k8s-ci-robot