Bug 2075831

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #2075621 +++

Cluster upgrade.[sig-mco] Machine config pools complete upgrade

is failing frequently in CI, see:
https://sippy.ci.openshift.org/sippy-ng/tests/4.11/analysis?test=Cluster%20upgrade.%5Bsig-mco%5D%20Machine%20config%20pools%20complete%20upgrade


Specific case: https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release[…]e-from-stable-4.10-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade/1514548265960345600

pod collect-profiles-27498960-h5qfg in namespace openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager does not get deleted. It seems that job track finalizer is holding the pod. 

upstream kube is pulling the feature due to bug: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/109487

upstream bug: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/109485

Looks like this is a regression from 4.9 to 4.10

See slack discussion for more details: https://coreos.slack.com/archives/C01CQA76KMX/p1649954805399049

--- Additional comment from W. Trevor King on 2022-04-14 19:44:29 CEST ---

Machine pools not completing updates can keep the overall OCP-core update from completing, so adding UpgradeBlocker to get this into the assessment pipeline [1].  We're asking the following questions to evaluate whether or not this bug warrants blocking an upgrade edge from either the previous X.Y or X.Y.Z. The ultimate goal is to avoid delivering an update which introduces new risk or reduces cluster functionality in any way. Sample answers are provided to give more context and the ImpactStatementRequested label has been added to this bug. When responding, please remove ImpactStatementRequested and set the ImpactStatementProposed label. The expectation is that the assignee answers these questions.

Who is impacted? If we have to block upgrade edges based on this issue, which edges would need blocking?
* example: Customers upgrading from 4.y.Z to 4.y+1.z running on GCP with thousands of namespaces, approximately 5% of the subscribed fleet
* example: All customers upgrading from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z fail approximately 10% of the time

What is the impact? Is it serious enough to warrant blocking edges?
* example: Up to 2 minute disruption in edge routing
* example: Up to 90 seconds of API downtime
* example: etcd loses quorum and you have to restore from backup

How involved is remediation (even moderately serious impacts might be acceptable if they are easy to mitigate)?
* example: Issue resolves itself after five minutes
* example: Admin uses oc to fix things
* example: Admin must SSH to hosts, restore from backups, or other non standard admin activities

Is this a regression (if all previous versions were also vulnerable, updating to the new, vulnerable version does not increase exposure)?
* example: No, it has always been like this we just never noticed
* example: Yes, from 4.y.z to 4.y+1.z Or 4.y.z to 4.y.z+1

[1]: https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/blob/master/enhancements/update/update-blocker-lifecycle/README.md