Migrate ./pkg/kubelet/cm/topologymanager to structured logging #132587
Conversation
|
Welcome @sandmman! |
|
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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. |
|
Hi @sandmman. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
|
/retitle Migrate ./pkg/kubelet/cm/topologymanager to structured logging |
|
@sandmman: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: kubernetes/wg-structured-logging-reviews. Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In 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. |
|
@sandmman: Re-titling can only be requested by trusted users, like repository collaborators. In 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. |
| @@ -30,13 +30,13 @@ type fakeManager struct { | |||
|
|
|||
| // NewFakeManager returns an instance of FakeManager | |||
| func NewFakeManager() Manager { | |||
| klog.InfoS("NewFakeManager") | |||
| klog.Background().Info("NewFakeManager") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe it's better to pass context to the NewFakeManager than creating background context.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the same is true for all calls of klog.Background() below.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've updated the constructor calls and make the other background calls explicit todos. I want to avoid exploding the number of files, soe of which are already being handled in #132636.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: sandmman The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
| @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ func (cm *containerManagerStub) ShouldResetExtendedResourceCapacity() bool { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func (cm *containerManagerStub) GetAllocateResourcesPodAdmitHandler() lifecycle.PodAdmitHandler { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it make sense to pass ctx here from the caller? It looks like it's available on the caller side.
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
Optionally add one or more of the following kinds if applicable:
/kind api-change
/kind deprecation
/kind failing-test
/kind flake
/kind regression
-->
What this PR does / why we need it:
Migrate ./pkg/kubelet/cm/topologymanager to contextual logging
Which issue(s) this PR is related to:
#130069
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: