Add support for PX-CSI to storage profile #3893
Conversation
kubevirt-bot
added
release-note
Signed-off-by: dsanatar <[email protected]>
Dsanatar
force-pushed
the
add-pxcsi-support
branch
from
7532c88 to
c62e4ab
Compare
|
makes sense, just recall some comments against this for some reason from #3644 (comment) |
|
/test pull-cdi-goveralls |
1 similar comment
|
/test pull-cdi-goveralls |
I discussed with the portworx folks and this is the recommendation they gave me for when using the px-csi driver. |
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: akalenyu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
kubevirt-bot
added
the
approved
|
Probably makes sense to backport this to at least 1.61 |
|
/cherry-pick release-v1.62 release-v1.61 |
|
@Dsanatar: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
Don't forget 1.63 |
|
/cherry-pick release-v1.63 |
|
@Dsanatar: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@Dsanatar: new pull request created: #3894 DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@Dsanatar: new pull request created: #3895 DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
/cherry-pick release-v1.61 |
|
@awels: new pull request created: #3896 DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
| } else if val == "pure_fa_file" { | ||
| return "pxd.portworx.com/pure_fa_file" | ||
| } | ||
| } else { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Dsanatar Are you sure about the else here? afaiu sharedv4_mount_options should be checked even if there is a backend parameter (other than pure_block/pure_fa_file).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I talked to the portworx folks and they said the backend parameter is only valid for PX-CSI, not the enterprise version.
6 participants
What this PR does / why we need it:
Portworx enterprise csi driver, and the PX-CSI driver are currently using the same provisioner string key
pxd.portworx.comhowever they have different storage capabilities. Add a check to see if storage class is PX-CSI and assign the associated capabilitiesWhich issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: