[release-4.19] OCPBUGS-60414: MachineOSConfig name should match MachineConfigPool

[umohnani8]

Add a restriction where the name of the MachineOSConfig object must be the same as the MachineConfigPool it is created for. This will ensure that we only have one MOSC per MCP.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@umohnani8: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-60414, which is invalid:

• release note text must be set and not match the template OR release note type must be set to "Release Note Not Required". For more information you can reference the OpenShift Bug Process.
• expected dependent Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54287 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENT RELEASE), CLOSED (DONE), CLOSED (DONE-ERRATA), but it is ON_QA instead

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

Add a restriction where the name of the MachineOSConfig object must be the same as the MachineConfigPool it is created for. This will ensure that we only have one MOSC per MCP.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

Hello @umohnani8! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

[JoelSpeed]

Did we lose the tests on the backport? We need to keep the tests so that we can show that they still work against older versions of the API server during the backport process

[umohnani8]

Did we lose the tests on the backport? We need to keep the tests so that we can show that they still work against older versions of the API server during the backport process

I accidentally dropped the tests, but have added them back now. Seems like the verify test will continue to fail until #2436 is backported as well. I have cherry-picked it here for now to see if it helps with the tests and will remove once it is officially backported.

[JoelSpeed]

/lgtm
/label backport-risk-assessed

[yuqi-zhang]

/hold

Until https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-60559 is resolved

[umohnani8]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@umohnani8: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-60414, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

7 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (4.19.z) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.z)
• bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)
• release note type set to "Release Note Not Required"
• dependent bug Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54287 is in the state Verified, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENT RELEASE), CLOSED (DONE), CLOSED (DONE-ERRATA))
• dependent Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54287 targets the "4.20.0" version, which is one of the valid target versions: 4.20.0
• bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @sergiordlr

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[umohnani8]

/hold cancel

@everettraven can I please get lgtm label on this again

[isabella-janssen]

/payload-job-with-prs periodic-ci-openshift-machine-config-operator-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-mco-disruptive openshift/machine-config-operator#5258

[openshift-ci]

@isabella-janssen: it appears that you have attempted to use some version of the payload command, but your comment was incorrectly formatted and cannot be acted upon. See the docs for usage info.

[isabella-janssen]

/payload-job-with-prs periodic-ci-openshift-machine-config-operator-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-mco-disruptive openshift/machine-config-operator#5258

[openshift-ci]

@isabella-janssen: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command

• periodic-ci-openshift-machine-config-operator-release-4.19-periodics-e2e-aws-mco-disruptive

See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/9788cd30-7e94-11f0-8c45-45136dc11bb6-0

[everettraven]

/lgtm

Adding a hold for the payload tests that @isabella-janssen is running. Feel free to remove if the hold is not necessary.
/hold

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven, JoelSpeed, umohnani8

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [JoelSpeed]

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

[isabella-janssen]

/unhold

Thanks for holding this for me to check @everettraven! This is good to go 🙂

[openshift-ci-robot]

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD f45379c and 2 for PR HEAD bcdc61a in total

[openshift-ci]

@umohnani8: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@umohnani8: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-60414: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

• openshift/api#2449

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-60414 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Add a restriction where the name of the MachineOSConfig object must be the same as the MachineConfigPool it is created for. This will ensure that we only have one MOSC per MCP.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-bot]

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

Distgit: ose-cluster-config-api
This PR has been included in build ose-cluster-config-api-container-v4.19.0-202508220436.p0.g1c614f5.assembly.stream.el9.
All builds following this will include this PR.

[umohnani8]

/cherry-pick release-4.18

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@umohnani8: new pull request created: #2458

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.18

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.