10000 refactor: move WithUnixSocketListener to a linux specific file by ritwikranjan · Pull Request #37399 · cilium/cilium · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

refactor: move WithUnixSocketListener to a linux specific file #37399

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.

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
Feb 11, 2025

Conversation

ritwikranjan
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

This pull request includes changes to refactor the handling of Unix socket listeners in the Hubble server options. The primary changes involve moving the Unix socket listener configuration to a new file specifically for Linux.

Why?

Retina uses hubble as it's dataplane. However we build the retina agent with windows as well, having the unix import is causing failure as we move towards using the newer release of cilium. To address this I have moved the option to use Unix import just for linux builds.

Refactoring Unix socket listener configuration:

Please ensure your pull request adheres to the following guidelines:

  • For first time contributors, read Submitting a pull request
  • All code is covered by unit and/or runtime tests where feasible.
  • All commits contain a well written commit description including a title,
    description and a Fixes: #XXX line if the commit addresses a particular
    GitHub issue.
  • If your commit description contains a Fixes: <commit-id> tag, then
    please add the commit author[s] as reviewer[s] to this issue.
  • All commits are signed off. See the section Developer’s Certificate of Origin
  • Provide a title or release-note blurb suitable for the release notes.
  • Are you a user of Cilium? Please add yourself to the Users doc
  • Thanks for contributing!
Moves Unix socket listener configuration to a new file specifically for Linux builds.

@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan requested a review from a team as a code owner January 31, 2025 19:05
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan requested a review from rolinh January 31, 2025 19:05
@maintainer-s-little-helper
Copy link

Commit 691bee0 does not match "(?m)^Signed-off-by:".

Please follow instructions provided in https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/contributing/development/contributing_guide/#developer-s-certificate-of-origin

@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot added dont-merge/needs-sign-off The author needs to add signoff to their commits before merge. dont-merge/needs-release-note-label The author needs to describe the release impact of these changes. labels Jan 31, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the kind/community-contribution This was a contribution made by a community member. label Jan 31, 2025
@maintainer-s-little-helper
Copy link

Commit 691bee0 does not match "(?m)^Signed-off-by:".

Please follow instructions provided in https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/contributing/development/contributing_guide/#developer-s-certificate-of-origin

@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from 3a36fac to 8ad16a0 Compare January 31, 2025 19:14
@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot removed the dont-merge/needs-sign-off The author needs to add signoff to their commits before merge. label Jan 31, 2025
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from 8ad16a0 to f9c9013 Compare January 31, 2025 19:15
@rolinh rolinh added sig/hubble release-note/misc This PR makes changes that have no direct user impact. labels Feb 3, 2025
@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot removed the dont-merge/needs-release-note-label The author needs to describe the release impact of these changes. label Feb 3, 2025
Copy link
Member
@rolinh rolinh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Works for me

@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from f9c9013 to 7aab1b5 Compare February 7, 2025 09:41
@maintainer-s-little-helper
Copy link

Commit 7aab1b5 does not match "(?m)^Signed-off-by:".

Please follow instructions provided in https://docs.cilium.io/en/stable/contributing/development/contributing_guide/#developer-s-certificate-of-origin

@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot added the dont-merge/needs-sign-off The author needs to add signoff to their commits before merge. label Feb 7, 2025
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from 7aab1b5 to 9dee687 Compare February 7, 2025 09:43
@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot removed the dont-merge/needs-sign-off The author needs to add signoff to their commits before merge. label Feb 7, 2025
@ritwikranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author
ritwikranjan commented Feb 7, 2025

@rolinh I have fixed the error reported by the linter. We also want to backport this change to v1.16 and v1.17, Should I make PR for the same or wait till this gets merged?

@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 7, 2025

@rolinh I have fixed the error reported by the linter. We also want to backport this change to v1.16 and v1.17, Should I make PR for the same or wait till this gets merged?

Could you squash the commits? We shouldn't create any backport PR until this one is merged. See the doc on backporting.

@rolinh rolinh added needs-backport/1.17 This PR / issue needs backporting to the v1.17 branch needs-backport/1.16 This PR / issue needs backporting to the v1.16 branch labels Feb 7, 2025
@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 7, 2025

I marked the PR for backporting to both v1.17 and v1.16 given it's a no-op unless one is building on Windows (which is not a build target for Cilium yet).

@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from 9dee687 to 468c7ba Compare February 7, 2025 10:23
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan requested a review from kaworu February 7, 2025 10:28
@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 7, 2025

/test

auto-merge was automatically disabled February 7, 2025 15:35

Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access

@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from a585e1c to 468c7ba Compare February 7, 2025 15:35
@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot removed the dont-merge/needs-sign-off The author needs to add signoff to their commits before merge. label Feb 7, 2025
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch 2 times, most recently from 43a46ee to 468c7ba Compare February 7, 2025 15:36
@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot added the ready-to-merge This PR has passed all tests and received consensus from code owners to merge. label Feb 7, 2025
@rolinh rolinh removed the ready-to-merge This PR has passed all tests and received consensus from code owners to merge. label Feb 10, 2025
@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 10, 2025

/test

@ritwikranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@rolinh can we rerun the failing tests? The log says it was cancelled

@ritwikranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

One of tests failed again. Also Conformance Kind Envoy Embedded / Installation and Connectivity Test (pull_request) was not retried i guess.

@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 11, 2025

One of tests failed again. Also Conformance Kind Envoy Embedded / Installation and Connectivity Test (pull_request) was not retried i guess.

The Conformance Kind Envoy Embedded test is not marked as required, there's no point retrying it.

It seems the same test failed again, might be broken. Could you try to rebase against main?

Signed-off-by: Ritwik Ranjan <ritwikranjan@microsoft.com>
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan force-pushed the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch from 468c7ba to 742b7c9 Compare February 11, 2025 09:12
@rolinh
Copy link
Member
rolinh commented Feb 11, 2025

/test

@maintainer-s-little-helper maintainer-s-little-helper bot added the ready-to-merge This PR has passed all tests and received consensus from code owners to merge. label Feb 11, 2025
@ritwikranjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is it good to merge now? anything else required here?

@rolinh rolinh added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 11, 2025
Merged via the queue into cilium:main with commit 067f790 Feb 11, 2025
64 checks passed
@ritwikranjan ritwikranjan deleted the fix/refactor-unix-reference branch February 11, 2025 14:38
@nbusseneau nbusseneau mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2025
6 tasks
@nbusseneau nbusseneau added backport-pending/1.16 The backport for Cilium 1.16.x for this PR is in progress. and removed needs-backport/1.16 This PR / issue needs backporting to the v1.16 branch labels Feb 14, 2025
@nbusseneau nbusseneau mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2025
22 tasks
@nbusseneau nbusseneau added backport-pending/1.17 The backport for Cilium 1.17.x for this PR is in progress. and removed needs-backport/1.17 This PR / issue needs backporting to the v1.17 branch labels Feb 14, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added backport-done/1.16 The backport for Cilium 1.16.x for this PR is done. backport-done/1.17 The backport for Cilium 1.17.x for this PR is done. and removed backport-pending/1.16 The backport for Cilium 1.16.x for this PR is in progress. backport-pending/1.17 The backport for Cilium 1.17.x for this PR is in progress. labels Feb 18, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport-done/1.16 The backport for Cilium 1.16.x for this PR is done. backport-done/1.17 The backport for Cilium 1.17.x for this PR is done. kind/community-contribution This was a contribution made by a community member. ready-to-merge This PR has passed all tests and received consensus from code owners to merge. release-note/misc This PR makes changes that have no direct user impact.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants
0