aws-efs-csi-driver

aws-efs-csi-driver copied to clipboard

Is this a bug fix or adding new feature?

• ref to https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/aws-efs-csi-driver/issues/539

What is this PR about? / Why do we need it?

• When IAM is attached by kiam, it doesn't work because controller should use host network What testing is done? hostNetwork: true

I0420 12:03:25.319649       1 controller.go:1332] provision "kube-system/efs-claim" class "efs-sc": started
I0420 12:03:25.319786       1 controller.go:731] CreateVolumeRequest name:"pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67" capacity_range:<required_bytes:5368709120 > volume_capabilities:<mount:<mount_flags:"tls" > access_mode:<mode:MULTI_NODE_MULTI_WRITER > > parameters:<key:"basePath" value:"/dynamic_provisioning" > parameters:<key:"directoryPerms" value:"700" > parameters:<key:"fileSystemId" value:"fs-0148daff742c320fa" > parameters:<key:"gidRangeEnd" value:"2000" > parameters:<key:"gidRangeStart" value:"1000" > parameters:<key:"provisioningMode" value:"efs-ap" >
I0420 12:03:25.320424       1 connection.go:182] GRPC call: /csi.v1.Controller/CreateVolume
I0420 12:03:25.320439       1 connection.go:183] GRPC request: {"capacity_range":{"required_bytes":5368709120},"name":"pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67","parameters":{"basePath":"/dynamic_provisioning","directoryPerms":"700","fileSystemId":"fs-0148daff742c320fa","gidRangeEnd":"2000","gidRangeStart":"1000","provisioningMode":"efs-ap"},"volume_capabilities":[{"AccessType":{"Mount":{"mount_flags":["tls"]}},"access_mode":{"mode":5}}]}
I0420 12:03:25.320897       1 event.go:282] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"kube-system", Name:"efs-claim", UID:"06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"494877023", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'Provisioning' External provisioner is provisioning volume for claim "kube-system/efs-claim"
I0420 12:03:25.487252       1 connection.go:185] GRPC response: {}
I0420 12:03:25.487304       1 connection.go:186] GRPC error: rpc error: code = Internal desc = Failed to fetch File System info: Describe File System failed: NoCredentialProviders: no valid providers in chain. Deprecated.
	For verbose messaging see aws.Config.CredentialsChainVerboseErrors
I0420 12:03:25.487332       1 controller.go:752] CreateVolume failed, supports topology = false, node selected false => may reschedule = false => state = Finished: rpc error: code = Internal desc = Failed to fetch File System info: Describe File System failed: NoCredentialProviders: no valid providers in chain. Deprecated.
	For verbose messaging see aws.Config.CredentialsChainVerboseErrors
I0420 12:03:25.487374       1 controller.go:1099] Final error received, removing PVC 06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67 from claims in progress
W0420 12:03:25.487391       1 controller.go:958] Retrying syncing claim "06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67", failure 5
E0420 12:03:25.487413       1 controller.go:981] error syncing claim "06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67": failed to provision volume with StorageClass "efs-sc": rpc error: code = Internal desc = Failed to fetch File System info: Describe File System failed: NoCredentialProviders: no valid providers in chain. Deprecated.
	For verbose messaging see aws.Config.CredentialsChainVerboseErrors

hostNetwork: false

I0420 12:06:27.114457       1 controller.go:1332] provision "kube-system/efs-claim" class "efs-sc": started
I0420 12:06:27.114764       1 controller.go:731] CreateVolumeRequest name:"pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67" capacity_range:<required_bytes:5368709120 > volume_capabilities:<mount:<mount_flags:"tls" > access_mode:<mode:MULTI_NODE_MULTI_WRITER > > parameters:<key:"basePath" value:"/dynamic_provisioning" > parameters:<key:"directoryPerms" value:"700" > parameters:<key:"fileSystemId" value:"fs-0148daff742c320fa" > parameters:<key:"gidRangeEnd" value:"2000" > parameters:<key:"gidRangeStart" value:"1000" > parameters:<key:"provisioningMode" value:"efs-ap" >
I0420 12:06:27.168880       1 connection.go:182] GRPC call: /csi.v1.Controller/CreateVolume
I0420 12:06:27.168912       1 connection.go:183] GRPC request: {"capacity_range":{"required_bytes":5368709120},"name":"pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67","parameters":{"basePath":"/dynamic_provisioning","directoryPerms":"700","fileSystemId":"fs-0148daff742c320fa","gidRangeEnd":"2000","gidRangeStart":"1000","provisioningMode":"efs-ap"},"volume_capabilities":[{"AccessType":{"Mount":{"mount_flags":["tls"]}},"access_mode":{"mode":5}}]}
I0420 12:06:27.169940       1 event.go:282] Event(v1.ObjectReference{Kind:"PersistentVolumeClaim", Namespace:"kube-system", Name:"efs-claim", UID:"06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67", APIVersion:"v1", ResourceVersion:"494877023", FieldPath:""}): type: 'Normal' reason: 'Provisioning' External provisioner is provisioning volume for claim "kube-system/efs-claim"
I0420 12:06:27.636618       1 connection.go:185] GRPC response: {"volume":{"capacity_bytes":5368709120,"volume_id":"fs-0148daff742c320fa::fsap-0a0233310b98754f9"}}
I0420 12:06:27.636764       1 connection.go:186] GRPC error: <nil>
I0420 12:06:27.636781       1 controller.go:762] create volume rep: {CapacityBytes:5368709120 VolumeId:fs-0148daff742c320fa::fsap-0a0233310b98754f9 VolumeContext:map[] ContentSource:<nil> AccessibleTopology:[] XXX_NoUnkeyedLiteral:{} XXX_unrecognized:[] XXX_sizecache:0}
I0420 12:06:27.636840       1 controller.go:838] successfully created PV pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67 for PVC efs-claim and csi volume name fs-0148daff742c320fa::fsap-0a0233310b98754f9
I0420 12:06:27.636889       1 controller.go:854] successfully created PV {GCEPersistentDisk:nil AWSElasticBlockStore:nil HostPath:nil Glusterfs:nil NFS:nil RBD:nil ISCSI:nil Cinder:nil CephFS:nil FC:nil Flocker:nil FlexVolume:nil AzureFile:nil VsphereVolume:nil Quobyte:nil AzureDisk:nil PhotonPersistentDisk:nil PortworxVolume:nil ScaleIO:nil Local:nil StorageOS:nil CSI:&CSIPersistentVolumeSource{Driver:efs.csi.aws.com,VolumeHandle:fs-0148daff742c320fa::fsap-0a0233310b98754f9,ReadOnly:false,FSType:,VolumeAttributes:map[string]string{storage.kubernetes.io/csiProvisionerIdentity: 1650456367089-8081-efs.csi.aws.com,},ControllerPublishSecretRef:nil,NodeStageSecretRef:nil,NodePublishSecretRef:nil,ControllerExpandSecretRef:nil,}}
I0420 12:06:27.637060       1 controller.go:1439] provision "kube-system/efs-claim" class "efs-sc": volume "pvc-06d3e19c-946f-4f15-baac-b73f3fc7ed67" provisioned
I0420 12:06:27.637088       1 controller.go:1456] provision "kube-system/efs-claim" class "efs-sc": succeeded

• :x: - login: @yuriydzobak / name: Yurii Dzobak . The commit (60248cd8968e7fece38d1ef9007e34c1d3f857a6) is not authorized under a signed CLA. Please click here to be authorized. For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

Welcome @yuriydzobak!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/aws-efs-csi-driver 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/aws-efs-csi-driver has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. :smiley:

Hi @yuriydzobak. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: yuriydzobak To complete the pull request process, please assign jsafrane after the PR has been reviewed. You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @jsafrane in a comment when ready.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

/assign @jsafrane

@yuriydzobak: 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/test-infra repository.

/assign @wongma7 /unassign

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

@k8s-triage-robot: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

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/test-infra repository.