Bug 2233071 - Avoid pods entering into CrashLoopBackOff due to older k8s.io/client-go packages
Summary: Avoid pods entering into CrashLoopBackOff due to older k8s.io/client-go packages
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation
Classification: Red Hat Storage
Component: csi-addons
Version: 4.13
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
high
Target Milestone: ---
: ODF 4.13.3
Assignee: Karthik U S
QA Contact: Sidhant Agrawal
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-08-21 10:35 UTC by Karthik U S
Modified: 2023-09-27 14:24 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 4.13.3-2
Doc Type: No Doc Update
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2023-09-27 14:22:42 UTC
Embargoed:
kramdoss: needinfo+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Github red-hat-storage ceph-csi pull 180 0 None open Bug 2233028: rebase: bump k8s.io dependencies to v0.26.7 2023-08-24 13:11:38 UTC
Github red-hat-storage kubernetes-csi-addons pull 84 0 None open Bug 2233071: rebase: bump k8s.io dependencies to v0.26.7 2023-08-25 05:19:38 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2023:5376 0 None None None 2023-09-27 14:24:13 UTC

Description Karthik U S 2023-08-21 10:35:15 UTC
Description of problem (please be detailed as possible and provide log
snippests):
OCP-4.14 has a dependency on the k8s.io/client-go library which should be on version v0.26.4 or higher to avoid pods entering into the CrashLoopBackOff state when aggregated discovery is enabled on kube 1.27+ environments, as seen in the bz #2228319.

This bz is to handle the same for csi-addons which currently runs client-go version v0.26.2 on release-4.13. Since OCP-4.14 has +1/-1 support matrix with ODF, similar issue can be hit on csi-addons with release-4.13.


Version of all relevant components (if applicable):
OCP-4.14.0
ODF-4.13.1


Does this issue impact your ability to continue to work with the product
(please explain in detail what is the user impact)?


Is there any workaround available to the best of your knowledge?


Rate from 1 - 5 the complexity of the scenario you performed that caused this
bug (1 - very simple, 5 - very complex)?


Can this issue reproducible?


Can this issue reproduce from the UI?


If this is a regression, please provide more details to justify this:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.


Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 15 errata-xmlrpc 2023-09-27 14:22:42 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 (Important: Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation 4.13.3 security and bug fix update), 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/RHSA-2023:5376


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.