*** Bug 1936454 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
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 UpgradeBlocker flag has been added to this bug. It will be removed if the assessment indicates that this should not block upgrade edges. 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 90seconds 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’s 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
> Who is impacted? If we have to block upgrade edges based on this issue, > which edges would need blocking? This impacts all non-AWS clusters that were created by OpenShift 4.1. > What is the impact? Is it serious enough to warrant blocking edges? The machine-api-controllers will crash loop, preventing the upgrade from completing. It will not affect workloads or server operations on the cluster. It will only affect the capability of the machine-api-operator to manage machines. > How involved is remediation (even moderately serious impacts might be > acceptable if they are easy to mitigate)? The remediation is to manually patch the status of the infrastructure resource to supply the expected `.status.platformStatus` field. Patching the status is a bit cumbersome because it involves patching a subresource, which is not possible directly using `oc`. It is doable using `oc proxy` and `curl`. > Is this a regression (if all previous versions were also vulnerable, > updating to the new, vulnerable version does not increase exposure)? > example: No, it’s 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 This is not a regression. The code in the machine-api-operator that expects the `.status.platformStatus` field was added in 4.6.
> This impacts all non-AWS clusters that were created by OpenShift 4.1. Based on #3 , removing "UpgradeBlocker" keyword.
This bug's PR is dev-approved and not yet merged, so I'm following issue DPTP-660 to do the pre-merge verifying for QE pre-merge verification goal of issue OCPQE-815 by using the bot to build one OCP build image with the open PR and did a upgrade. Here is the verification steps: Upgraded one baremetal clsuter from 4.1.41 to 4.6.39 successfully. $ oc get clusterversion -o json|jq ".items[0].status.history" [ { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T18:37:31Z", "image": "registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release@sha256:0e84fb79931b8ee5c7c2f868f0de8b0720dce208ac324664afa544db81fa21ab", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T17:10:58Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": true, "version": "4.6.39" }, { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T16:26:28Z", "image": "registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release@sha256:c67fe644d1c06e6d7694e648a40199cb06e25e1c3cfd5cd4fdac87fd696d2297", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T15:03:47Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": true, "version": "4.5.41" }, { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T13:25:56Z", "image": "registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release@sha256:a035dddd8a5e5c99484138951ef4aba021799b77eb9046f683a5466c23717738", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T09:48:26Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": true, "version": "4.4.33" }, { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T08:53:02Z", "image": "registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release@sha256:9ff90174a170379e90a9ead6e0d8cf6f439004191f80762764a5ca3dbaab01dc", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T07:38:48Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": true, "version": "4.3.40" }, { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T07:19:33Z", "image": "registry.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release@sha256:449b9b839d2cdf33ff2a494a5863d24dc1b436f995c286d8f8d58821ae293b82", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T06:09:59Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": true, "version": "4.2.36" }, { "completionTime": "2021-07-16T04:22:14Z", "image": "quay.io/openshift-release-dev/ocp-release@sha256:a8f706d139c8e77d884ccedbf67d69eefd67b66dcf69ee1032b507fe3acbf8c8", "startedTime": "2021-07-16T03:51:47Z", "state": "Completed", "verified": false, "version": "4.1.41" } ] $ oc get clusterversion NAME VERSION AVAILABLE PROGRESSING SINCE STATUS version 4.6.39 True False 7h41m Cluster version is 4.6.39 $ oc get infrastructures.config.openshift.io/cluster -ojson { "apiVersion": "config.openshift.io/v1", "kind": "Infrastructure", "metadata": { "creationTimestamp": "2021-07-16T03:51:42Z", "generation": 1, "name": "cluster", "resourceVersion": "254", "selfLink": "/apis/config.openshift.io/v1/infrastructures/cluster", "uid": "21ce86ea-e5e9-11eb-9a48-fa163e4d9e60" }, "spec": { "cloudConfig": { "name": "" } }, "status": { "apiServerInternalURI": "https://api-int.kewang16upb1.....com:6443", "apiServerURL": "https://api.kewang16upb1.....com:6443", "etcdDiscoveryDomain": "kewang16upb1.....com", "infrastructureName": "kewang16upb1-56sws", "platform": "None" } } So the bug is pre-merge verified. After the PR gets merged, the bug will be moved to VERIFIED by the bot automatically or, if not working, by me manually.
4.6 is mostly outside of support, and the EUS version only accepts critical fixes, see https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/openshift#dates so I'm going to close it as won't fix.