-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 256
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
🐛 Ensure tags and trunks for existing ports #2252
base: release-0.9
Are you sure you want to change the base?
🐛 Ensure tags and trunks for existing ports #2252
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Hi @mquhuy. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-openstack ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
/ok-to-test |
a615eff
to
0498c10
Compare
/retest |
2 similar comments
/retest |
/retest |
0498c10
to
a0063ed
Compare
Signed-off-by: Huy Mai <[email protected]>
a0063ed
to
e0d2fee
Compare
I have rebased to make the linter happy. |
What this PR does / why we need it:
When a port is created, it is tagged and explicitly checked if it needs a trunk, but if the port already exists for some reason, it is taken without any of those checking. This PR fixes that by adding a similar check for the existing ports, similar to the check in new ports.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Technically this rarely happens, as a failure in VM creation will clean up all ports, hence we don't normally have existing ports with same name and network ID as the one we need. Still, if that happens that there exists such a port, a problem may arise.
This is an issue with release-0.9. I'm not sure if other releases may behave in the same manner.
TODOs:
/hold