Skip to content

CNV-76395: fix Bonding interface bugs in NNC form #149

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
Open
adamviktora wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

CNV-76395: fix Bonding interface bugs in NNC form #149

adamviktora wants to merge 1 commit into from
+74 −64

Conversation

@adamviktora
Copy link

@adamviktora adamviktora commented Jan 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

This PR fixes some bugs in Node network configuration create form -> step 3 Uplink connection -> Bonding interface

  1. maps different Aggregation modes (OVS bonding BALANCE_SLB vs the other Linux bonding options) correctly to the Policy YAML

    • in this doc in the bottom you can see difference between the two

  2. able to reselect different Aggregation mode after selection

The core of the select fix is this else part:

else {
    getLinkAggregationSettings(policy).mode = selectedAggregationMode;
  }

Where we update the aggregation mode even if the getBondInterface(policy) or getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy) already exists

  1. able to edit Bonding name after Aggregation mode selection

The core of the name bug fix is to always keep bonding name only in one place: either bond interface for Linux bonding getBondInterface(policy) or OVS bridge bond port for OVS bonding getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy).

Demo

Before:

NNC_bonding_before.mp4

After:

NNC_bonding_after.mp4

@adamviktora
CNV-76395: fix Bonding interface bugs in NNC form
f7d4e60 
- able to reselect different aggregation mode after selection
- able to edit bonding name after aggregation mode selection
- map Linux / OVS bonding to the YAML correctly
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Jan 13, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 13, 2026 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@adamviktora: This pull request references CNV-76395 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

This PR fixes some bugs in Node network configuration create form -> step 3 Uplink connection ->Bonding interface

  • maps different Aggregation modes (Linux vs OVS bonding) correctly to the Policy YAML

  • able to reselect different Aggregation mode after selection

  • able to edit Bonding name after Aggregation mode selection

The core of the name bug fix is to always keep bonding name only in one place: either bond interface for Linux bonding getBondInterface(policy) or OVS bridge bond port for OVS bonding getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy).

The core of the select fix is this else part:

else {
   getLinkAggregationSettings(policy).mode = selectedAggregationMode;
 }

Where we update the aggregation mode even if the getBondInterface(policy) or getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy) already exists

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 openshift-ci bot requested review from pcbailey and tnisan January 13, 2026 11:43
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 13, 2026 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@adamviktora: This pull request references CNV-76395 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

This PR fixes some bugs in Node network configuration create form -> step 3 Uplink connection ->Bonding interface

  1. maps different Aggregation modes (OVS bonding BALANCE_SLB vs the other Linux bonding options) correctly to the Policy YAML

    • in this doc in the bottom you can see difference between the two

  2. able to reselect different Aggregation mode after selection

The core of the select fix is this else part:

else {
   getLinkAggregationSettings(policy).mode = selectedAggregationMode;
 }

Where we update the aggregation mode even if the getBondInterface(policy) or getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy) already exists

  1. able to edit Bonding name after Aggregation mode selection

The core of the name bug fix is to always keep bonding name only in one place: either bond interface for Linux bonding getBondInterface(policy) or OVS bridge bond port for OVS bonding getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy).

Demo

Before:

NNC_bonding_before.mp4

After:

NNC_bonding_after.mp4

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-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 13, 2026 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@adamviktora: This pull request references CNV-76395 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

This PR fixes some bugs in Node network configuration create form -> step 3 Uplink connection -> Bonding interface

  1. maps different Aggregation modes (OVS bonding BALANCE_SLB vs the other Linux bonding options) correctly to the Policy YAML

    • in this doc in the bottom you can see difference between the two

  2. able to reselect different Aggregation mode after selection

The core of the select fix is this else part:

else {
   getLinkAggregationSettings(policy).mode = selectedAggregationMode;
 }

Where we update the aggregation mode even if the getBondInterface(policy) or getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy) already exists

  1. able to edit Bonding name after Aggregation mode selection

The core of the name bug fix is to always keep bonding name only in one place: either bond interface for Linux bonding getBondInterface(policy) or OVS bridge bond port for OVS bonding getOVSBridgeBondPort(policy).

Demo

Before:

NNC_bonding_before.mp4

After:

NNC_bonding_after.mp4

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.

@adamviktora
Copy link
Author

adamviktora commented Jan 13, 2026

/retest

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 13, 2026

@adamviktora: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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.

galkremer1
galkremer1 approved these changes Jan 13, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@galkremer1 galkremer1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 13, 2026
@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 13, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: adamviktora, galkremer1
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign tnisan for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

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

Reviewers

@pcbailey pcbailey Awaiting requested review from pcbailey

@tnisan tnisan Awaiting requested review from tnisan

1 more reviewer

@galkremer1 galkremer1 galkremer1 approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@galkremer1 galkremer1

Labels

jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@adamviktora @openshift-ci-robot @galkremer1