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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Make gwctl work with Policies having multiple targetRefs #3217

Closed

deszhou wants to merge 4 commits into kubernetes-sigs:main from deszhou:gwctl-targetRefs

Member

deszhou commented Jul 25, 2024

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #3196

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Make gwctl work with Policies having multiple targetRefs

gwctl get policies -A

NAME                          KIND                       TARGET REFS                                                      POLICY TYPE  AGE
health-check-gatewayclass     HealthCheckPolicy.foo.com  foo-gatewayclass (GatewayClass), foo-gateway (Gateway), +2 more  Inherited    6d

gwctl describe policies health-check-gateway

Name: health-check-gatewayclass
Group: foo.com
Kind: HealthCheckPolicy
Inherited: "true"
Spec:
  ...
  targetRefs:
  - group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: GatewayClass
    name: foo-gatewayclass
    namespace: default
  - group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: Gateway
    name: foo-gateway
    namespace: default

deszhou added 2 commits

July 25, 2024 18:12


          Make gwctl work with Policies having multiple targetRefs

667e73b


          chore:del TestPoliciesPrinter_Print_And_PrintDescribeView2

09fe7a8

k8s-ci-robot added the release-note label

Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Jul 25, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: deszhou
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign gauravkghildiyal for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

gwctl/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

k8s-ci-robot added the area/gwctl label

k8s-ci-robot requested review from gauravkghildiyal and robscott

July 25, 2024 10:26

k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes size/XL labels


          chore:del convertPoliciesToRefsTable and fix lint test

d13c46c

Member

gauravkghildiyal commented Jul 25, 2024

Thanks @deszhou.

I'll give a more detailed look later, but just wanted to call out that the tricky thing here would be that we would like to support both targetRef and targetRefs i.e. allow both multiple targets and a single target.

Member Author

deszhou commented Jul 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Thanks @deszhou.

I'll give a more detailed look later, but just wanted to call out that the tricky thing here would be that we would like to support both targetRef and targetRefs i.e. allow both multiple targets and a single target.

SGTM, and for consistency, we should use the targetRefs field when describing. I’ll update the PR with this shortly


          Add support for both targetRefs and targetRef fields in gwctl

Member

gauravkghildiyal commented Aug 4, 2024

Sorry for the delay here @deszhou. I'm attempting to get #3244 in and that may have some serious merge conflicts with this. I'd really appreciate if we can wait out a bit here, or else I'll try making an effort of rebasing on top of this change.

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/manager.go

Comment on lines +252 to +256

+              			Namespace: u.GetNamespace(),
+              		}
+              		if objRef.Namespace == "" {
+              			objRef.Namespace = u.GetNamespace()
+              		}

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

I may be missing something, but I understand objRef.Namespace has been initialized to u.GetNamespace() already, no? Then, if it's an empty string, it's set again to the same u.GetNamespace()? Maybe you meant:

Suggested change

      
            			Namespace: u.GetNamespace(),
          
            		}
          
            		if objRef.Namespace == "" {
          
            			objRef.Namespace = u.GetNamespace()
          
            		}
          
            			Namespace: structuredPolicy.GetNamespace(),
          
            		}
          
            		if objRef.Namespace == "" {
          
            			objRef.Namespace = u.GetNamespace()
          
            		}

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/manager.go

Comment on lines +257 to +259

+              		if targetRef.Namespace != nil {
+              			objRef.Namespace = string(*targetRef.Namespace)
+              		}

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

If we're willing to import k8s.io/utils/ptr, this kind of pattern can be written:

objRef.Namespace = ptr.Deref(targetRef.Namespace, structuredPolicy.GetNamespace())

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/manager.go

Comment on lines +317 to +319

+              		if objRef.Kind == "Namespace" && objRef.Name == "" {
+              			objRef.Name = "default"
+              		}

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

It looks like this could be done outside the loop.

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/manager.go

Comment on lines +323 to +325

+              		if objRef.Kind != "Namespace" && objRef.Namespace == "" {
+              			objRef.Namespace = "default"
+              		}

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

Same. Could be done outside the loop.

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/manager.go

               	result, ok := spec.(map[string]interface{})
               	if !ok {
               		return nil
               	}

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

A bit out of scope, but we could probably use unstructured.NestedMap instead of unstructured.NestedFieldCopy at line 347 and thus save the extra type casting.

guicassolato reviewed

View reviewed changes

gwctl/pkg/policymanager/merger.go

    
            @@ -149,10 +156,26 @@ func mergePolicy(parent, child Policy) (Policy, error) {
          
              	result.u.SetUnstructuredContent(resultUnstructured)

              	// Merging two policies means the targetRef no longer makes any sense since

              	// since they can be conflicting. So we unset the targetRef.

              	result.targetRef = common.ObjRef{}

              	result.targetRefs = mergeTargetRefs(parent.targetRefs, child.targetRefs)

Contributor

guicassolato Aug 30, 2024

Say parent has targetRefs: [a, b] and child has targetRefs: [a, c]. So the merged (effective) policy applies to [a, b, c]?

Sorry, I may need to educate myself on how policies to be merged are selected in the first place – or, more precisely, how the policies are assigned to a particular node in the resource model. It just triggered me the idea that, if you ask for the effective policy for a, it will return a merge of parent and child, along with the info that such effective policy also applies to c. However, that's not entire really true, because if you ask for the effective policy for c, it may return something identical to child only (not a necessarily the parent+child merge.)

Concrete example – Assume a == gateway-1, b == route-1, and c == route-2, though with route-1.parentRefs == [gateway-1] and route-2.parentRefs == [gateway-2]. (Notice route-2 is NOT parented by gateway-1.)

IOW:

kind: Gateway
metadata:
  name: gateway-1
---
kind: Gateway
metadata:
  name: gateway-2
---
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: route-1
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - kind: Gateway
    name: gateway-1
---
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: route-2
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - kind: Gateway
    name: gateway-2
---
kind: Policy
metadata:
  name: parent
spec:
  targetRefs:
  - kind: Gateway
    name: gateway-1
  - kind: HTTPRoute
    name: route-1
---
kind: Policy
metadata:
  name: child
spec:
  targetRefs:
  - kind: Gateway
    name: gateway-1
  - kind: HTTPRoute
    name: route-2

Effective policies:

gateway-1 → parent + child (targetRefs: [gateway-1, route-1, route-2])
gateway 2 → ∅
route-1 → parent (targetRefs: [gateway-1, route-1])
route-2 → child (targetRefs: [gateway-1, route-2])

By reading the first line, if you trust parent applies to route-2 (or that child applies to route-1 analogously), you would be wrong.

Member Author

deszhou commented Sep 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Thanks, @guicassolato! I’ll update this PR and fix the issue after #3244.

Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 10, 2024

@deszhou: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-gateway-api-crds-validation-4	`7408571`	link	true	`/test pull-gateway-api-crds-validation-4`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase label

Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 17, 2024

PR needs rebase.

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.

shaneutt added the priority/important-longterm label

shaneutt added this to the v1.3.0 milestone

deszhou closed this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area/gwctl cncf-cla: yes needs-rebase priority/important-longterm release-note size/XL