OCPBUGS-54790: Move packageserver PDB from guest cluster to management cluster by dhgautam99 · Pull Request #8459 · openshift/hypershift

dhgautam99 · 2026-05-07T13:13:42Z

What this PR does / why we need it:

The packageserver PodDisruptionBudget was being created in the guest cluster's
openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace by CVO. However, packageserver
pods run on the management cluster in the clusters-<hosted-cluster> namespace,
making the guest cluster PDB ineffective.

This PR:

Prevents CVO from creating the packageserver PDB in the guest cluster (via manifestsToOmit)
Cleans up the orphaned PDB on existing clusters during upgrade (via resourcesToRemove)
Creates the PDB in the management cluster namespace using the cpov2 framework

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes OCPBUGS-54790

Special notes for your reviewer:

The PDB cleanup applies to all platforms (both IBM/PowerVS and default) since
packageserver runs on the management cluster regardless of platform.

Checklist:

Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.
Relevant issues have been referenced.
This change includes docs.
This change includes unit tests.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Improvements
- Added a PodDisruptionBudget for the packageserver (minAvailable: 1) to improve availability during disruptions and ensure it is managed as part of lifecycle operations.
Tests
- Added a unit test validating the packageserver component is created and named "packageserver".

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-05-07T13:13:44Z

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: LGTM mode

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-05-07T13:13:49Z

@dhgautam99: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54790, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (5.0.0) matches configured target version for branch (5.0.0)
bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

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

Details

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

The packageserver PodDisruptionBudget was being created in the guest cluster's
openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace by CVO. However, packageserver
pods run on the management cluster in the clusters-<hosted-cluster> namespace,
making the guest cluster PDB ineffective.

This PR:

Prevents CVO from creating the packageserver PDB in the guest cluster (via manifestsToOmit)

Cleans up the orphaned PDB on existing clusters during upgrade (via resourcesToRemove)

Creates the PDB in the management cluster namespace using the cpov2 framework

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes OCPBUGS-54790

Special notes for your reviewer:

The PDB cleanup applies to all platforms (both IBM/PowerVS and default) since
packageserver runs on the management cluster regardless of platform.

Checklist:

Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.

Relevant issues have been referenced.

This change includes docs.

This change includes unit tests.

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 · 2026-05-07T13:13:51Z

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

coderabbitai · 2026-05-07T13:14:04Z

Note

Reviews paused

It looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the reviews.auto_review.auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits setting.

Use the following commands to manage reviews:

@coderabbitai resume to resume automatic reviews.
@coderabbitai review to trigger a single review.

Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:

▶️ Resume reviews
🔍 Trigger review

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A PodDisruptionBudget manifest (packageserver-pdb, minAvailable: 1) was added. The packageserver component now adapts that PDB manifest via AdaptPodDisruptionBudget, and a unit test for NewComponent was added. The CVO deployment code imports policy/v1 and includes packageserver-pdb in resourcesToRemove for IBMCloudPlatform/PowerVSPlatform and the default cleanup list.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Operator as HostedControlPlane Operator
    participant Component as packageserver Component
    participant CVO as CVO / resourcesToRemove
    participant Kube as Kubernetes API

    Operator->>Component: NewComponent()
    Component->>Component: WithManifestAdapter(pdb.yaml -> AdaptPodDisruptionBudget)
    Operator->>CVO: prepare resourcesToRemove
    CVO->>CVO: include packageserver-pdb in resourcesToRemove
    CVO->>Kube: generate payload / cleanup objects
    Operator->>Kube: apply manifests (packageserver-pdb ensured)

Suggested reviewers

cblecker
csrwng

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 11

✅ Passed checks (11 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: moving the packageserver PodDisruptionBudget from the guest cluster to the management cluster, which aligns with all file changes and PR objectives.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Stable And Deterministic Test Names	✅ Passed	PR does not contain Ginkgo tests. The new component_test.go uses standard Go testing with static function name 'TestNewComponent'. Check is not applicable to this PR.
Test Structure And Quality	✅ Passed	Test follows codebase patterns: single responsibility, NewWithT harness, parallel execution, matching repository conventions for component tests.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	PodDisruptionBudget is topology-aware via AdaptPodDisruptionBudget(): SingleReplica→minAvailable:1, HighlyAvailable→maxUnavailable:1. No unsafe patterns found.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	No Ginkgo e2e tests added; the only test added is a simple Gomega unit test without IPv4 assumptions or external connectivity requirements.
No-Weak-Crypto	✅ Passed	PR contains no weak cryptography usage. Changes involve Kubernetes PodDisruptionBudget manifest configuration and component wiring with no cryptographic operations.
Container-Privileges	✅ Passed	No container privilege escalation detected. PDB manifest has no container specs; deployment lacks privileged, hostPID/Network/IPC, SYS_ADMIN, or allowPrivilegeEscalation settings.
No-Sensitive-Data-In-Logs	✅ Passed	No logging statements found in any of the changed code; no passwords, tokens, API keys, credentials, PII, session IDs, or sensitive data are logged anywhere in the PR changes.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-05-07T13:15:46Z

@dhgautam99: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54790, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target version (5.0.0) matches configured target version for branch (5.0.0)
bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Details

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

The packageserver PodDisruptionBudget was being created in the guest cluster's
openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace by CVO. However, packageserver
pods run on the management cluster in the clusters-<hosted-cluster> namespace,
making the guest cluster PDB ineffective.

This PR:

Prevents CVO from creating the packageserver PDB in the guest cluster (via manifestsToOmit)

Cleans up the orphaned PDB on existing clusters during upgrade (via resourcesToRemove)

Creates the PDB in the management cluster namespace using the cpov2 framework

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes OCPBUGS-54790

Special notes for your reviewer:

The PDB cleanup applies to all platforms (both IBM/PowerVS and default) since
packageserver runs on the management cluster regardless of platform.

Checklist:

Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.

Relevant issues have been referenced.

This change includes docs.

This change includes unit tests.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Improvements

Enhanced availability protection for the packageserver component to minimize service disruptions during cluster maintenance operations.

Improved component configuration management for operational consistency and platform-specific handling.

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.

codecov · 2026-05-07T13:18:16Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 41.51%. Comparing base (832b848) to head (8bf10e8).
⚠️ Report is 41 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8459      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   41.50%   41.51%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         758      758              
  Lines       93689    93695       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        38882    38901      +19     
+ Misses      52070    52057      -13     
  Partials     2737     2737

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ontrollers/hostedcontrolplane/v2/cvo/deployment.go	`41.17% <100.00%> (+0.58%)`	⬆️
...stedcontrolplane/v2/olm/packageserver/component.go	`73.91% <100.00%> (+73.91%)`	⬆️

Flag	Coverage Δ
cmd-support	`34.86% <ø> (ø)`
cpo-hostedcontrolplane	`43.69% <100.00%> (+0.09%)`	⬆️
cpo-other	`43.17% <ø> (ø)`
hypershift-operator	`51.57% <ø> (ø)`
other	`31.64% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

cblecker · 2026-05-07T15:45:42Z

/lgtm

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-05-07T15:46:11Z

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aks
/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-aws-upgrade-hypershift-operator
/test e2e-azure-self-managed
/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced
/test e2e-v2-aws

cwbotbot · 2026-05-07T17:32:24Z

Test Results

e2e-aws

Status: ✅ PASS
Started: 2026-05-08T18:23:45Z
View Job
View Job History

e2e-aks

Status: ✅ PASS
Started: 2026-05-07T15:47:04Z
View Job
View Job History

hypershift-jira-solve-ci · 2026-05-07T17:39:01Z

AI Test Failure Analysis

Job: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-azure-self-managed | Build: 2052414791430967296 | Cost: $3.95796535 | Failed step: hypershift-azure-run-e2e-self-managed

View full analysis report

_{Generated by hypershift-analyze-e2e-failure post-step using Claude claude-opus-4-6}

hypershift-jira-solve-ci · 2026-05-07T17:39:42Z

AI Test Failure Analysis

Job: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aws | Build: 2052414791355469824 | Cost: $3.2685650000000006 | Failed step: hypershift-aws-run-e2e-nested

View full analysis report

_{Generated by hypershift-analyze-e2e-failure post-step using Claude claude-opus-4-6}

dhgautam99 · 2026-05-08T12:08:38Z

/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-azure-self-managed
/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced

hypershift-jira-solve-ci · 2026-05-08T15:09:05Z

AI Test Failure Analysis

Job: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aws | Build: 2052722353925787648 | Cost: $2.8874605499999997 | Failed step: hypershift-aws-run-e2e-nested

View full analysis report

_{Generated by hypershift-analyze-e2e-failure post-step using Claude claude-opus-4-6}

…ster The packageserver PDB was being created in the guest cluster's openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace by CVO, but packageserver pods run on the management cluster in the clusters-<hosted-cluster> namespace. This moves the PDB to the correct location. - Add packageserver PDB manifest to manifestsToOmit to prevent CVO from creating it in guest clusters - Add packageserver-pdb to resourcesToRemove for all platforms to clean up the orphaned PDB on existing clusters during upgrade - Register PDB manifest adapter in packageserver component to create the PDB in the management cluster namespace

Regenerate CVO deployment and packageserver component test fixtures to reflect the packageserver PDB being omitted from the guest cluster CVO payload and added to the management cluster namespace.

openshift-ci · 2026-06-09T19:47:05Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dhgautam99, enxebre

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [enxebre]

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

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-10T03:41:47Z

/verified by @dhgautam99
Verified via nightly build 5.0.0-0.nightly-2026-06-09-022526 that packageserver-pdb is not getting created on guest cluster.
Also, tried to use custom image of CPO using code fix and it generated packageserver-pdb on $hcp-namespace and cleaned up existing PDB on guest cluster.

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-06-10T03:41:59Z

@dhgautam99: This PR has been marked as verified by @dhgautam99.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @dhgautam99
Verified via nightly build 5.0.0-0.nightly-2026-06-09-022526 that packageserver-pdb is not getting created on guest cluster.
Also, tried to use custom image of CPO using code fix and it generated packageserver-pdb on $hcp-namespace and cleaned up existing PDB on guest cluster.

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.

csrwng · 2026-06-10T14:23:10Z

/lgtm

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-06-10T14:26:35Z

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aks
/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-aws-upgrade-hypershift-operator
/test e2e-azure-self-managed
/test e2e-azure-v2-self-managed
/test e2e-kubevirt-aws-ovn-reduced
/test e2e-v2-aws
/test e2e-v2-gke

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-06-10T16:41:35Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 4755e9c and 2 for PR HEAD 8bf10e8 in total

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-11T11:33:58Z

/test e2e-aws

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-11T11:34:55Z

/test e2e-aks

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-06-11T12:40:01Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 76b27ab and 1 for PR HEAD 8bf10e8 in total

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-11T14:21:02Z

/test e2e-aws
/test e2e-aks

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-06-11T17:59:32Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 0b33006 and 0 for PR HEAD 8bf10e8 in total

openshift-merge-bot · 2026-06-11T19:59:07Z

/hold

Revision 8bf10e8 was retested 3 times: holding

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-12T05:36:39Z

/test e2e-aks
/test e2e-aws

openshift-ci · 2026-06-12T05:37:16Z

@dhgautam99: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-azure-self-managed	`8bf10e8`	link	true	`/test e2e-azure-self-managed`

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.

hypershift-jira-solve-ci · 2026-06-12T07:09:17Z

The analysis is complete. Both jobs failed due to the exact same infrastructure issue. Here is the report:

Test Failure Analysis Complete

Job Information

Prow Job 1: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aws
Build ID 1: 2065307284912738304
Prow Job 2: pull-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aks
Build ID 2: 2065307284883378176
PR: OCPBUGS-54790: Move packageserver PDB from guest cluster to management cluster #8459 (OCPBUGS-54790: Move packageserver PDB from guest cluster to management cluster)
Job Start: 2026-06-12T05:36:42Z
Job End: 2026-06-12T05:37:12Z (both jobs ran for ~30 seconds)

Test Failure Analysis

Error

e2e-aws: could not resolve inputs: could not determine inputs for step [release:n4minor]:
  failed to resolve release n4minor: failed to request latest release:
  GET https://amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org/api/v1/releasestream/4.19.0-0.ci/latest
  giving up after 5 attempt(s)

e2e-aks: could not resolve inputs: could not determine inputs for step [release:latest-418]:
  failed to resolve release latest-418: failed to request latest release:
  GET https://amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org/api/v1/releasestream/4.18.0-0.ci/latest
  giving up after 5 attempt(s)

Summary

Both jobs failed at the initialize phase before any test code was built or executed. The ci-operator could not resolve release inputs because the OpenShift Release Controller API (amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org) is returning HTTP 503 — "Application is not available". This is an ongoing CI infrastructure outage affecting all jobs that depend on release stream resolution. The failures are not related to PR #8459's code changes in any way.

Root Cause

The OpenShift Release Controller service at amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org is down (returning HTTP 503 with "Application is not available"). This service provides the latest release payload information that ci-operator needs to resolve release stream inputs (e.g., 4.19.0-0.ci for the n4minor release used by e2e-aws, and 4.18.0-0.ci for the latest-418 release used by e2e-aks).

The ci-operator retried each request 5 times and then gave up, reporting the failure reason as resolving_inputs:resolving_release. No test steps, image builds, or cluster provisioning were attempted — the jobs died in the first 15 seconds during input resolution.

This outage is still ongoing as of the time of this analysis — both the 4.19.0-0.ci and 4.18.0-0.ci release stream endpoints continue to return 503.

Recommendations

Retest once the Release Controller is restored — simply /retest or re-trigger both jobs after the infrastructure is back. No code changes are needed.
Monitor the Release Controller status — check https://amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org for availability. The service currently returns "Application is not available" on all endpoints.
Check #forum-ocp-crt or #announce-testplatform on Slack for any announcements about the Release Controller outage and expected recovery time.
Do not modify PR OCPBUGS-54790: Move packageserver PDB from guest cluster to management cluster #8459 — the code changes are not related to these failures.

Evidence

Evidence	Detail
Failure phase	`initialize` — before any test steps ran
Failure reason	`resolving_inputs:resolving_release`
e2e-aws blocked release	`n4minor` → `4.19.0-0.ci/latest` (5 retries, all failed)
e2e-aks blocked release	`latest-418` → `4.18.0-0.ci/latest` (5 retries, all failed)
Job duration	~30 seconds each (05:36:42Z → 05:37:12Z)
Build log size	17 lines each (no test execution occurred)
Artifacts produced	Only `ci-operator.log`, `ci-operator-metrics.json`, `junit_job.xml` — no test step artifacts
Release Controller status (current)	HTTP 503 — "Application is not available"
Release Controller URL	`https://amd64.ocp.releases.ci.openshift.org/api/v1/releasestream/`
PR code involvement	None — failure occurred before source code was compiled

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-16T05:44:23Z

/retest

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-16T08:53:33Z

/unhold

dhgautam99 · 2026-06-16T08:53:43Z

/unhold

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-06-16T10:14:21Z

@dhgautam99: Jira Issue Verification Checks: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54790
✔️ This pull request was pre-merge verified.
✔️ All associated pull requests have merged.
✔️ All associated, merged pull requests were pre-merge verified.

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-54790 has been moved to the MODIFIED state and will move to the VERIFIED state when the change is available in an accepted nightly payload. 🕓

Details

In response to this:

What this PR does / why we need it:

The packageserver PodDisruptionBudget was being created in the guest cluster's
openshift-operator-lifecycle-manager namespace by CVO. However, packageserver
pods run on the management cluster in the clusters-<hosted-cluster> namespace,
making the guest cluster PDB ineffective.

This PR:

Prevents CVO from creating the packageserver PDB in the guest cluster (via manifestsToOmit)

Cleans up the orphaned PDB on existing clusters during upgrade (via resourcesToRemove)

Creates the PDB in the management cluster namespace using the cpov2 framework

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes OCPBUGS-54790

Special notes for your reviewer:

The PDB cleanup applies to all platforms (both IBM/PowerVS and default) since
packageserver runs on the management cluster regardless of platform.

Checklist:

Subject and description added to both, commit and PR.

Relevant issues have been referenced.

This change includes docs.

This change includes unit tests.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Improvements

Added a PodDisruptionBudget for the packageserver (minAvailable: 1) to improve availability during disruptions and ensure it is managed as part of lifecycle operations.

Tests

Added a unit test validating the packageserver component is created and named "packageserver".

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 added jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the do-not-merge/needs-area label May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added area/control-plane-operator Indicates the PR includes changes for the control plane operator - in an OCP release and removed do-not-merge/needs-area labels May 7, 2026

dhgautam99 force-pushed the remove-packageserver-pdb-from-guest branch from 46bdd14 to ffe96be Compare May 7, 2026 13:51

dhgautam99 marked this pull request as ready for review May 7, 2026 14:10

openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot requested review from cblecker and enxebre May 7, 2026 14:12

openshift-ci Bot assigned cblecker May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 7, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added area/platform/powervs PR/issue for PowerVS (PowerVSPlatform) platform area/testing Indicates the PR includes changes for e2e testing labels Jun 9, 2026

github-actions Bot deployed to docs-preview/pr-8459 June 9, 2026 19:46 View deployment

dhruv-gautam added 2 commits June 10, 2026 01:16

test(CPO): update test fixtures for packageserver PDB changes

8bf10e8

Regenerate CVO deployment and packageserver component test fixtures to reflect the packageserver PDB being omitted from the guest cluster CVO payload and added to the management cluster namespace.

dhgautam99 force-pushed the remove-packageserver-pdb-from-guest branch from 9e56ef8 to 8bf10e8 Compare June 9, 2026 19:46

openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Jun 10, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 10, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 11, 2026

openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 16, 2026

openshift-merge-bot Bot merged commit ee9099c into openshift:main Jun 16, 2026
42 checks passed

Conversation

dhgautam99 commented May 7, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented May 7, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented May 7, 2026

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented May 7, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

Sequence Diagram(s)

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented May 7, 2026

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

cblecker commented May 7, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented May 7, 2026

Uh oh!

cwbotbot commented May 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Test Results

e2e-aws

e2e-aks

Uh oh!

hypershift-jira-solve-ci Bot commented May 7, 2026

AI Test Failure Analysis

Uh oh!

hypershift-jira-solve-ci Bot commented May 7, 2026

AI Test Failure Analysis

Uh oh!

dhgautam99 commented May 8, 2026

Uh oh!

hypershift-jira-solve-ci Bot commented May 8, 2026

AI Test Failure Analysis

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Uh oh!

dhgautam99 commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

csrwng commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

dhgautam99 commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dhgautam99 commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dhgautam99 commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-merge-bot Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

dhgautam99 commented May 7, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

coderabbitai Bot commented May 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented May 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cwbotbot commented May 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

openshift-ci Bot commented Jun 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading