AUTOSCALE-853: onboard azure-karpenter-provider repo - #83168
AUTOSCALE-853: onboard azure-karpenter-provider repo#83168LucasAndFlores wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited) Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
WalkthroughThe change onboards ChangesAzure Karpenter provider onboarding
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Suggested labels: Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 15✅ Passed checks (15 passed)
✨ 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 |
LucasAndFlores
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
|
@LucasAndFlores: This pull request references AUTOSCALE-853 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "5.0.0" version, but no target version was set. 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. |
1 similar comment
|
@LucasAndFlores: This pull request references AUTOSCALE-853 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "5.0.0" version, but no target version was set. 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. |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
approved
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
`@ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yaml`:
- Around line 5-14: Update the image promotion configuration so the built
provider image is promoted under the pipeline name
azure-karpenter-provider-test. Remove the src-to-azure-karpenter-provider
additional_images mapping and its exclusion, or instead map
azure-karpenter-provider to azure-karpenter-provider-test while preserving the
intended promoted image name.
In
`@core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_pluginconfig.yaml`:
- Around line 5-8: Remove the repository-level lgtm block for
openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure, including its review_acts_as_lgtm
setting, while preserving the repository-specific approve configuration.
🪄 Autofix
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: e782bce8-cfc1-4f38-9a61-ed7bff5459a3
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (2)
ci-operator/jobs/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-postsubmits.yamlis excluded by!ci-operator/jobs/**ci-operator/jobs/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-presubmits.yamlis excluded by!ci-operator/jobs/**
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_pluginconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_prowconfig.yaml
|
/pj-rehearse pull-ci-openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-images pull-ci-openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-unit pull-ci-openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-verify |
|
@LucasAndFlores: now processing your pj-rehearse request. Please allow up to 10 minutes for jobs to trigger or cancel. |
bfc9b9d to
5d330be
Compare
|
Note GitHub couldn't provide a complete incremental comparison for this pull request, so CodeRabbit is performing a full review instead. This review may take a little longer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
`@ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yaml`:
- Around line 3-6: Add a promotion.to mapping for the
azure-karpenter-provider-test image in the images configuration, targeting the
azure-karpenter-provider image name in ocp/5.0. Preserve the existing
dockerfile_path and build output while ensuring the provider image is published
under the intended name.
🪄 Autofix
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: b916a8bc-f09f-49fa-b65f-b02d962caa81
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
ci-operator/jobs/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-presubmits.yamlis excluded by!ci-operator/jobs/**
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_pluginconfig.yamlcore-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_prowconfig.yaml
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_pluginconfig.yaml
- core-services/prow/02_config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/_prowconfig.yaml
| images: | ||
| items: | ||
| - dockerfile_path: openshift/Containerfile.rhel | ||
| to: azure-karpenter-provider-test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗄️ Data Integrity & Integration | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win
Add the promotion.to mapping for the provider image.
The images block builds azure-karpenter-provider-test, but this file does not declare a promotion target. The provider image is therefore not published under the intended azure-karpenter-provider name in ocp/5.0.
Add a mapping for the built image, or rename the image output and promote it directly.
Proposed mapping
images:
items:
- dockerfile_path: openshift/Containerfile.rhel
to: azure-karpenter-provider-test
+promotion:
+ to:
+ - additional_images:
+ azure-karpenter-provider: azure-karpenter-provider-test
+ excluded_images:
+ - azure-karpenter-provider-test
+ name: "5.0"
+ namespace: ocpBased on the PR objective, the image must be promoted to ocp/5.0.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In
`@ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yaml`
around lines 3 - 6, Add a promotion.to mapping for the
azure-karpenter-provider-test image in the images configuration, targeting the
azure-karpenter-provider image name in ocp/5.0. Preserve the existing
dockerfile_path and build output while ensuring the provider image is published
under the intended name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is accurate. We should declare a promotion object to build the image and promote it to the integration ci stream.
Something like:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also think we should rename this to azure-karpenter-provider-azure similar to how it is for aws:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@maxcao13, agreed. The AWS configuration is the correct pattern.
Add a promotion entry that maps the built image to the provider image name in the ocp/5.0 integration CI stream.
🧠 Learnings used
Learnt from: sivaramsingana
Repo: openshift/release PR: 79753
File: ci-operator/config/quay/quay-tests/quay-quay-tests-master__ocp-421-s390x-quay.yaml:1-41
Timestamp: 2026-05-27T11:27:23.893Z
Learning: In the openshift/release repo, for CI-operator configuration YAMLs located under `ci-operator/config/`, do not require `images` or `promotion` sections when the configuration is test-only and does not build any new container images.
- Include `images` only if the config actually builds new images.
- Include `promotion` only if any built images must be promoted.
- Test-only configs that only consume `base_images` in `workflow/test` steps (and do not build new images) should be considered complete without `images` or `promotion`.
Learnt from: smg247
Repo: openshift/release PR: 79989
File: ci-operator/config/openshift/sippy/openshift-sippy-main.yaml:21-29
Timestamp: 2026-06-02T17:01:09.558Z
Learning: In openshift/release, for ci-operator config YAMLs under ci-operator/config/, changes limited to the `images` and/or `promotion` sections (including adding/removing image build entries or promotion targets) should not trigger running `make update` or regenerating ProwJob spec YAMLs under ci-operator/jobs/. `ci-operator` reads `images` and `promotion` directly from these config YAMLs at runtime, and those fields are not embedded into the generated ProwJob specs. Only changes that affect ProwJob spec generation/structure (e.g., adding/renaming tests, changing job types, or modifying metadata that feeds into ProwJob spec generation) require `make update` and regenerated ProwJob YAMLs.
You are interacting with an AI system.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧩 Analysis chain
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
azure_file="ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yaml"
aws_file="ci-operator/config/openshift/aws-karpenter-provider-aws/openshift-aws-karpenter-provider-aws-main.yaml"
printf '%s\n' '--- Azure configuration ---'
cat -n "$azure_file"
printf '%s\n' '--- AWS configuration ---'
cat -n "$aws_file"
printf '%s\n' '--- References to the Azure test image ---'
rg -n -C 3 --glob '*.yaml' --glob '*.yml' '\bazure-karpenter-provider-test\b' .Length of output: 4535
@maxcao13, agreed. The AWS configuration uses the repository-specific image name as the build output and promotes it directly to ocp/5.0.
The Azure configuration should make the same change:
images:
items:
- dockerfile_path: openshift/Containerfile.rhel
to: azure-karpenter-provider-azure
promotion:
to:
- name: "5.0"
namespace: ocpThe old azure-karpenter-provider-test name has no other references. No consumer changes are required. I also used the existing CI-operator learning: an images and promotion-only change does not require generated ProwJob updates.
- Rename the Azure CI image output to
azure-karpenter-provider-azure. - Add direct promotion to the
ocp/5.0integration stream. - Keep the existing
dockerfile_pathand release configuration unchanged.
✏️ Learnings added
Learnt from: maxcao13
Repo: openshift/release PR: 83168
File: ci-operator/config/openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure/openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main.yaml:3-6
Timestamp: 2026-08-10T16:46:07.045Z
Learning: In `openshift/release`, the CI-operator configuration for `openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure` should use `azure-karpenter-provider-azure` as the `images.items[].to` name and promote it directly to `ocp/5.0`, matching the convention in `ci-operator/config/openshift/aws-karpenter-provider-aws/openshift-aws-karpenter-provider-aws-main.yaml`.
Note: Learnings are effective only in the context of similar code segments. To apply general coding guidelines, please configure review instructions. You can manage existing learnings in the app.
🧠 Learnings used
Learnt from: sivaramsingana
Repo: openshift/release PR: 79753
File: ci-operator/config/quay/quay-tests/quay-quay-tests-master__ocp-421-s390x-quay.yaml:1-41
Timestamp: 2026-05-27T11:27:23.893Z
Learning: In the openshift/release repo, for CI-operator configuration YAMLs located under `ci-operator/config/`, do not require `images` or `promotion` sections when the configuration is test-only and does not build any new container images.
- Include `images` only if the config actually builds new images.
- Include `promotion` only if any built images must be promoted.
- Test-only configs that only consume `base_images` in `workflow/test` steps (and do not build new images) should be considered complete without `images` or `promotion`.
Learnt from: smg247
Repo: openshift/release PR: 79989
File: ci-operator/config/openshift/sippy/openshift-sippy-main.yaml:21-29
Timestamp: 2026-06-02T17:01:09.558Z
Learning: In openshift/release, for ci-operator config YAMLs under ci-operator/config/, changes limited to the `images` and/or `promotion` sections (including adding/removing image build entries or promotion targets) should not trigger running `make update` or regenerating ProwJob spec YAMLs under ci-operator/jobs/. `ci-operator` reads `images` and `promotion` directly from these config YAMLs at runtime, and those fields are not embedded into the generated ProwJob specs. Only changes that affect ProwJob spec generation/structure (e.g., adding/renaming tests, changing job types, or modifying metadata that feeds into ProwJob spec generation) require `make update` and regenerated ProwJob YAMLs.
- 📌 Commit the changes to this branch
You are interacting with an AI system.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is accurate. We should declare a promotion object to build the image and promote it to the integration ci stream.
Something like:
I don't think promotion is something that should be solved in this ticket. We have this one that explicit mention the promotion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems like the humans are having a chat. I'll hop back into my burrow for now. If you need me again, just tag @coderabbitai in a new comment, and I'll come hopping out!
|
/retest ci/prow/config |
|
/retest-required |
|
/pj-rehearse pull-ci-openshift-Azure-karpenter-provider-azure-main-images |
|
@LucasAndFlores: now processing your pj-rehearse request. Please allow up to 10 minutes for jobs to trigger or cancel. |
| images: | ||
| items: | ||
| - dockerfile_path: openshift/Containerfile.rhel | ||
| to: azure-karpenter-provider-test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is accurate. We should declare a promotion object to build the image and promote it to the integration ci stream.
Something like:
| images: | ||
| items: | ||
| - dockerfile_path: openshift/Containerfile.rhel | ||
| to: azure-karpenter-provider-test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also think we should rename this to azure-karpenter-provider-azure similar to how it is for aws:
5d330be to
784b49b
Compare
|
Note GitHub couldn't provide a complete incremental comparison for this pull request, so CodeRabbit is performing a full review instead. This review may take a little longer. |
|
[REHEARSALNOTIFIER]
Interacting with pj-rehearseComment: Once you are satisfied with the results of the rehearsals, comment: |
|
/test owners |
|
/lgtm thanks! |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LucasAndFlores, maxcao13 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@LucasAndFlores: 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. |
3 participants
Summary by CodeRabbit
openshift/Azure-karpenter-provider-azure.ocp/5.0, and integration releases.approveandlgtmplugins with self-approval disabled.approvedandlgtmlabels while excluding blocking labels.