Skip to content

remove special condition for workload id for conformance tests #5127

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 11, 2024
+3 −15
Merged

remove special condition for workload id for conformance tests #5127

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
18 changes: 3 additions & 15 deletions scripts/kind-with-registry.sh
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -203,34 +203,22 @@ function upload_to_blob() {
# to be mounted on the kind cluster and hence extra mount flags are required.
function createKindForAZWI() {
echo "creating workload-identity-enabled kind configuration"
if [ -n "${CONFORMANCE_FLAVOR}" ] && [ -n "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB}" ] && [ -n "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY}" ]; then
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nojnhuh nojnhuh Sep 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IIRC this condition in the kind script to use a different workload ID setup is a vestige of the pre-community infra and/or pre-workload ID default days and no longer is needed now.

@jackfrancis Does that sound right?

Copy link
Contributor

@jackfrancis jackfrancis Sep 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That sounds plausible, conformance E2E test runs will tell us!

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nojnhuh nojnhuh Sep 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like the tests are all far enough along now that they've all created a cluster successfully, so I think we're in the clear.

echo "using pre-existing service-account-issuer for kind cluster"
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH="${REPO_ROOT}/kind-wi-sa.pub"
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH="${REPO_ROOT}/kind-wi-sa.key"
echo "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB}" > "${KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH}"
echo "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY}" > "${KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH}"
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_ISSUER="https://oidcissuercapzci.blob.core.windows.net/oidc-capzci/"
else
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH="${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH}"
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH="${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH}"
KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_ISSUER="${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_ISSUER}"
fi
cat <<EOF | "${KIND}" create cluster --name "${KIND_CLUSTER_NAME}" --config=-
kind: Cluster
apiVersion: kind.x-k8s.io/v1alpha4
nodes:
- role: control-plane
extraMounts:
- hostPath: "${KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH}"
- hostPath: "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_PUB_FILEPATH}"
containerPath: /etc/kubernetes/pki/sa.pub
- hostPath: "${KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH}"
- hostPath: "${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_SIGNING_KEY_FILEPATH}"
containerPath: /etc/kubernetes/pki/sa.key
kubeadmConfigPatches:
- |
kind: ClusterConfiguration
apiServer:
extraArgs:
service-account-issuer: ${KIND_SERVICE_ACCOUNT_ISSUER}
service-account-issuer: ${SERVICE_ACCOUNT_ISSUER}
service-account-key-file: /etc/kubernetes/pki/sa.pub
service-account-signing-key-file: /etc/kubernetes/pki/sa.key
controllerManager:
Expand Down