Skip to content

Conversation

pperiyasamy
Copy link
Member

@pperiyasamy pperiyasamy commented Aug 27, 2025

The _stackmanager binary was removed in libreswan 5.3 and is no longer required for prerequisite checks. This commit conditionally runs _stackmanager only when the binary is present on the system.

cc @huiran0826

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from miheer and pliurh August 27, 2025 13:22
@pperiyasamy pperiyasamy force-pushed the libreswan-5.3 branch 2 times, most recently from c8da991 to 1d489fe Compare September 12, 2025 07:55
@pperiyasamy pperiyasamy changed the title [DNM] Skip running _stackmanager for libreswan 5.3 Skip running _stackmanager for libreswan 5.3+ Sep 12, 2025
/usr/libexec/ipsec/_stackmanager start
# Check kernel modules only for libreswan version <= 5.2. The _stackmanager binary is
# removed from 5.3 onwards, so this check is not needed on later versions.
if [ -e /usr/libexec/ipsec/_stackmanager ]; then
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One space should be enough. :)
Otherwise, lgtm.

The _stackmanager binary was removed in libreswan 5.3 and is no
longer required for prerequisite checks. This commit conditionally
runs _stackmanager only when the binary is present on the system.

Signed-off-by: Periyasamy Palanisamy <[email protected]>
@pliurh
Copy link
Contributor

pliurh commented Sep 25, 2025

/retest-required

@pliurh
Copy link
Contributor

pliurh commented Sep 25, 2025

@pperiyasamy if libreswan 5.3 is what we have in the OCP master, why do we still keep the code for versions <= 5.2?

@pperiyasamy
Copy link
Member Author

@pperiyasamy if libreswan 5.3 is what we have in the OCP master, why do we still keep the code for versions <= 5.2?

@pliurh currently master is still with libreswan 5.2. even if we bump libreswan version t0 5.3 in master, this script is still getting used when upgrading it from 5.2 to 5.3.

@pliurh
Copy link
Contributor

pliurh commented Sep 30, 2025

/retest-required

@igsilya
Copy link

igsilya commented Sep 30, 2025

Note: will also need this change down to at least 4.19 as we'll get 5.3 there as soon as it is released.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Sep 30, 2025

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

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec 1d489fe link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial 1d489fe link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial
ci/prow/e2e-openstack-ovn 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-openstack-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-ovn-step-registry 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-ovn-step-registry
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-single-node 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-single-node
ci/prow/4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade 53dbf9b link false /test 4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-azure-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec-2of2 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec-2of2
ci/prow/e2e-aws-hypershift-ovn-kubevirt 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-hypershift-ovn-kubevirt
ci/prow/4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade 53dbf9b link false /test 4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade 53dbf9b link false /test 4.20-upgrade-from-stable-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 53dbf9b link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec-1of2 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-ipsec-1of2
ci/prow/security 53dbf9b link false /test security
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-shared-to-local-gateway-mode-migration 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-shared-to-local-gateway-mode-migration
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-local-to-shared-gateway-mode-migration 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-local-to-shared-gateway-mode-migration
ci/prow/e2e-ovn-hybrid-step-registry 53dbf9b link false /test e2e-ovn-hybrid-step-registry

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

@pliurh
Copy link
Contributor

pliurh commented Oct 10, 2025

/approve
/lgtm

@pliurh
Copy link
Contributor

pliurh commented Oct 10, 2025

/retest-required

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 10, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 10, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: pliurh, pperiyasamy

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants