Bug 1753932

Summary:	[IPI][OSP] [Feature:Platform][Smoke] Managed cluster should ensure control plane pods do not run in best-effort QoS [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] fails
Product:	OpenShift Container Platform	Reporter:	Martin André <m.andre>
Component:	Machine Config Operator	Assignee:	Martin André <m.andre>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Michael Nguyen <mnguyen>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	4.2.0	CC:	schoudha, tsedovic
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	4.2.0
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2019-10-16 06:41:39 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Martin André 2019-09-20 10:13:31 UTC

One of the consequences of making the static pods known to k8s in #1122 is that now the smoke test complain that some of the pods do not comply with the requirements.

The "[Feature:Platform][Smoke] Managed cluster should ensure control plane pods do not run in best-effort QoS [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]" test fails with:

fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/operators/qos.go:50]: Sep 19 23:57:41.194: 
3 pods found in best-effort QoS:
openshift-openstack-infra/haproxy-y0dvd81v-1bfcb-dpkkn-master-0 is running in best-effort QoS
openshift-openstack-infra/haproxy-y0dvd81v-1bfcb-dpkkn-master-1 is running in best-effort QoS
openshift-openstack-infra/haproxy-y0dvd81v-1bfcb-dpkkn-master-2 is running in best-effort QoS

Comment 3 errata-xmlrpc 2019-10-16 06:41:39 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2019:2922