OCPBUGS-84491: Set terminationMessagePolicy on gateway proxy containers by gcs278 · Pull Request #1428 · openshift/cluster-ingress-operator

gcs278 · 2026-05-01T14:05:05Z

Summary

Extends the Istio gatewayclass customization to include a deployment overlay that sets terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the istio-proxy container, satisfying the OCP platform policy enforced by the termination-message-policy monitor test.
Renames buildHorizontalPodAutoscalerConfig to buildGatewayClassesConfig since it now builds all per-gatewayclass overlays (HPA + deployment).
Adds an E2E assertion in ensureGatewayObjectSuccess to verify the policy is applied.

Test plan

Unit tests pass (go test ./pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/...)
E2E: TestGatewayAPI verifies terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the gateway proxy deployment

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-05-01T14:05:13Z

@gcs278: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-84491, 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)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @melvinjoseph86

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

Details

In response to this:

Summary

Extends the Istio gatewayclass customization to include a deployment overlay that sets terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the istio-proxy container, satisfying the OCP platform policy enforced by the termination-message-policy monitor test.

Renames buildHorizontalPodAutoscalerConfig to buildGatewayClassesConfig since it now builds all per-gatewayclass overlays (HPA + deployment).

Adds an E2E assertion in ensureGatewayObjectSuccess to verify the policy is applied.

Test plan

Unit tests pass (go test ./pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/...)

E2E: TestGatewayAPI verifies terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the gateway proxy deployment

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

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.

coderabbitai · 2026-05-01T14:05:17Z

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

The PR replaces the previous HPA-focused config builder with a new buildGatewayClassesConfig that produces per-GatewayClass JSON overlays containing horizontalPodAutoscaler (min/max replicas) and a deployment.template.spec.containers entry for the istio-proxy container with terminationMessagePolicy: FallbackToLogsOnError. Call sites in Istio install paths and controller logic now use buildGatewayClassesConfig. Tests were updated to create combined gateway class configs via gatewayclassConfig/gatewayclassesConfig, and an e2e helper plus invocation were added to assert the terminationMessagePolicy on gateway deployments. A new unexported constant gatewayProxyContainerName was added.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 9 | ❌ 3

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings, 1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 66.67% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
Microshift Test Compatibility	⚠️ Warning	TestGatewayAPI uses config.openshift.io APIs unavailable on MicroShift without [Skipped:MicroShift] or apigroup protection.	Add [apigroup:config.openshift.io] tag to TestGatewayAPI name, add [Skipped:MicroShift] label, or guard with exutil.IsMicroShiftCluster() check.
Test Structure And Quality	❓ Inconclusive	Check mentions "Ginkgo test code" but modified files use standard Go tests (testing.T), not Ginkgo (Describe/It blocks). Instruction mismatch with codebase.	Clarify if check applies to standard Go tests or only Ginkgo. For Go tests: single responsibility, timeouts, and error messages all meet quality criteria.

✅ Passed checks (9 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title directly and specifically describes the main change: setting terminationMessagePolicy on gateway proxy containers, which is the core objective of this PR.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is directly related to the changeset, explaining the summary of changes, renaming rationale, and test plan for the terminationMessagePolicy implementation.
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 doesn't use Ginkgo; all Go t.Run test names are static strings with no dynamic values. Dynamic data only in test bodies.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	No new Ginkgo e2e tests are added. Changes only add a test helper to verify deployment container configuration, which doesn't require multi-node clusters and already handles SNO.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	PR introduces no topology-breaking scheduling constraints. Code properly checks InfrastructureTopology to set appropriate minReplicas and only adds terminationMessagePolicy to containers.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract	✅ Passed	No non-JSON stdout writes detected. No process-level functions (main/init/BeforeSuite), static module-level vars only, and test code uses t.Logf() intercepted by framework.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	The PR adds only a test helper function, not Ginkgo test blocks. No IPv4 assumptions or external connectivity detected.

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

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests

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

coderabbitai

Caution

Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.

⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go (1)
186-196: ⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major

Sort the expected GatewayClass names before serializing JSON.

gatewayclassesConfig preserves caller order, but buildGatewayClassesConfig marshals a Go map (line 287 of istio_sail_installer.go), which causes json.Marshal to sort keys lexicographically. The multi-class case at Line 697 passes "openshift-default", "openshift-internal", "openshift-custom", which produces JSON keys in a different order than the production code's alphabetically sorted output.
🔧 Proposed fix
+import "sort"
+
 func gatewayclassesConfig(config string, gatewayclasses ...string) json.RawMessage {
+    sort.Strings(gatewayclasses)
     return json.RawMessage(fmt.Appendf(nil, `{%s}`, strings.Join(func() []string {
         var result []string
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go` around lines 186 -
196, The test helper gatewayclassesConfig preserves caller order, but
buildGatewayClassesConfig marshals a map which results in lexicographically
sorted keys; to make tests match production, sort the gatewayclasses slice
before building the JSON in gatewayclassesConfig so the serialized keys are in
alphabetical order (e.g., apply a sort.Strings(gatewayclasses) step inside
gatewayclassesConfig) so multi-class cases like the test passing
"openshift-default", "openshift-internal", "openshift-custom" produce the same
key order as buildGatewayClassesConfig.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Outside diff comments:
In `@pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go`:
- Around line 186-196: The test helper gatewayclassesConfig preserves caller
order, but buildGatewayClassesConfig marshals a map which results in
lexicographically sorted keys; to make tests match production, sort the
gatewayclasses slice before building the JSON in gatewayclassesConfig so the
serialized keys are in alphabetical order (e.g., apply a
sort.Strings(gatewayclasses) step inside gatewayclassesConfig) so multi-class
cases like the test passing "openshift-default", "openshift-internal",
"openshift-custom" produce the same key order as buildGatewayClassesConfig.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: e96c66c0-732d-460d-96d0-f1693667cb2b

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9e5261e and c411daf.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_olm.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go
test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go
test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go

coderabbitai

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go (1)

187-200: ⚡ Quick win

Build the fixture from structured data instead of hand-assembling JSON.

Sorting the input slice and concatenating strings makes this helper side-effectful and easy to drift from buildGatewayClassesConfig. A small map[string]json.RawMessage + json.Marshal here would mirror production, remove the manual sort, and avoid future JSON-shape mismatches.

♻️ Proposed fix

 func gatewayclassesConfig(config string, gatewayclasses ...string) json.RawMessage {
-	sort.Strings(gatewayclasses)
-	return fmt.Appendf(nil, `{%s}`, strings.Join(func() []string {
-		var result []string
-
-		for _, name := range gatewayclasses {
-			result = append(result, fmt.Sprintf(`"%s":%s`, name, config))
-		}
-
-		return result
-	}(), ","))
+	payload := make(map[string]json.RawMessage, len(gatewayclasses))
+	for _, name := range gatewayclasses {
+		payload[name] = json.RawMessage(config)
+	}
+	b, _ := json.Marshal(payload)
+	return b
 }

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go` around lines 187 -
200, The helpers gatewayclassesConfig and gatewayclassConfig should build JSON
from structured data instead of hand-assembling strings: replace
gatewayclassesConfig's manual sort/concatenation with constructing a
map[string]json.RawMessage (or map[string]interface{}) populated by iterating
gatewayclasses and using json.RawMessage of gatewayclassConfig, then
json.Marshal the map; change gatewayclassConfig to return a structured value
(map or struct) or json.RawMessage built via json.Marshal rather than a
formatted string so the test fixture mirrors buildGatewayClassesConfig and
avoids ordering/shape drift.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Nitpick comments:
In `@pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go`:
- Around line 187-200: The helpers gatewayclassesConfig and gatewayclassConfig
should build JSON from structured data instead of hand-assembling strings:
replace gatewayclassesConfig's manual sort/concatenation with constructing a
map[string]json.RawMessage (or map[string]interface{}) populated by iterating
gatewayclasses and using json.RawMessage of gatewayclassConfig, then
json.Marshal the map; change gatewayclassConfig to return a structured value
(map or struct) or json.RawMessage built via json.Marshal rather than a
formatted string so the test fixture mirrors buildGatewayClassesConfig and
avoids ordering/shape drift.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: eeb1b9d7-ee49-4780-8807-96c392a0fb42

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c411daf and 4a97fc4.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_olm.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go
test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go
test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)

test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_olm.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go`:
- Around line 830-836: The test currently only verifies terminationMessagePolicy
for all containers but doesn't assert the presence of the istio-proxy container;
update the check to first ensure a container with Name == "istio-proxy" exists
in dep.Spec.Template.Spec.Containers, fail/return false if not found, and then
verify that container's TerminationMessagePolicy equals
corev1.TerminationMessageFallbackToLogsOnError (or, alternatively, locate the
istio-proxy container by iterating dep.Spec.Template.Spec.Containers and assert
c.Name == "istio-proxy" before checking c.TerminationMessagePolicy); reference
the existing loop and symbols c.Name, c.TerminationMessagePolicy, and
corev1.TerminationMessageFallbackToLogsOnError when implementing this change.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 1700a141-8bcd-4cf5-a05f-d26b7328c988

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4a97fc4 and 65ca117.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_olm.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go
test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go
test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go

gcs278 · 2026-05-04T13:45:17Z

hypershift flake
/test hypershift-e2e-aks

techpreview is failing because #1408 needs to merge

Miciah · 2026-05-05T18:07:34Z

#1408 has merged.

/test e2e-aws-operator-techpreview

rikatz · 2026-05-05T21:35:52Z

change lgtm, thanks @gcs278
/lgtm
/approve

let's wait now for verified label

openshift-ci · 2026-05-05T21:36:24Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rikatz

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~~ [rikatz]

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

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go`:
- Around line 265-278: The overlay currently sets
deployment.spec.template.spec.containers to a single-entry list (using
gatewayProxyContainerName), which will replace the entire containers list under
Strategic Merge Patch and drop other containers; fix it by removing this partial
"containers" entry from the overlay or by replacing it with a targeted patch
that modifies only the istio-proxy container's terminationMessagePolicy (e.g.,
use a JSONPatch/JSON6902 or a strategic-merge entry that includes the container
"name" and full container spec), referencing the
deployment.spec.template.spec.containers overlay and gatewayProxyContainerName
so you either supply all containers in that list or use a patch that updates
only terminationMessagePolicy for the container named by
gatewayProxyContainerName.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
Create a new PR with the fixes

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Central YAML (inherited)

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Enterprise

Run ID: 4c9190ad-d24a-4277-a60d-ea81a9f44b3c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 65ca117 and da0bcdf.

📒 Files selected for processing (6)

pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/controller_test.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_olm.go
pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go
test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go
test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

test/e2e/gateway_api_test.go

melvinjoseph86 · 2026-05-06T08:52:32Z

/retest-required

rikatz · 2026-05-06T12:16:43Z

/lgtm
thanks for fixing the thing we discussed on Slack :D wasn't really urgent, but sounds good!

gcs278 · 2026-05-06T13:39:45Z

Update - we may get this for free in https://github.com/istio/istio/pull/60102/changes#diff-25656c65a83f75b949b39ee2750b8b72d0936e4aece66265979cee93a3326892 (we don't need this PR if that merges)
/hold

gcs278 · 2026-05-21T14:12:05Z

Actually - not sure why I thought istio/istio#60102 was going to set terminationMessagePolicy on the Gateway Proxy pods - it only sets it for Istiod.

This is still needed.

/unhold

gcs278 · 2026-05-21T14:15:45Z

@rikatz I updated to feedback your reviews and changes on #1440.

Mind taking a look?

rikatz · 2026-05-25T13:46:23Z

@@ -210,10 +211,10 @@ func openshiftValues(enableInferenceExtension bool, operandNamespace string, gat
 			}
 		}
 		if extraConfig.infraConfig != nil {


I got slightly concerned now by the config initialization be inside this if where extraConfig and extraConfig.infraConfig are not null, but I have checked the code and there is apparently no situation where extraConfig or extraConfig.infraConfig will be null, so this is more like a defensive measure.

Anyway, just have it in mind in case we decide to change this behavior in the future, that we may lose the terminationPolicy config in case extraConfig or extraConfig.infraConfig are null

ah true - it works today since extraConfig and infraConfig are always non-nil, but it's a foot gun if we refactor later. I generally prefer to avoid these foot guns - updated.

rikatz · 2026-05-25T13:48:59Z

/lgtm

@gcs278 left one minor comment about the if branches, but they are minor and more like a long term concern.

I am adding a hold in case you want to discuss about it, but otherwise we can merge this
/hold

Add a deployment overlay to the gatewayclass configuration that sets terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the istio-proxy container, satisfying the OCP platform policy enforced by the termination-message-policy monitor test. https://redhat.atlassian.net/browse/OCPBUGS-84491 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

rikatz · 2026-05-26T13:58:13Z

much better, thanks @gcs278
/lgtm

rikatz · 2026-05-26T13:58:17Z

/hold cancel

gcs278 · 2026-05-27T22:54:38Z

Unrelated failures
/retest

gcs278 · 2026-05-28T02:23:23Z

/retest

rikatz · 2026-05-28T12:31:41Z

/retest-required

openshift-ci · 2026-05-28T15:29:15Z

@gcs278: 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.

rhamini3 · 2026-05-29T17:11:32Z

marking bug as verified

confirmed the gateway deployment contains terminationMessagePolicy: FallbackToLogsOnError and gateway pod logs does not if it is healthy

 % oc -n openshift-ingress get deployment gateway-openshift-default -o yaml | grep termination
        terminationMessagePath: /dev/termination-log
        terminationMessagePolicy: FallbackToLogsOnError
      terminationGracePeriodSeconds: 30
iamin@iamin-mac openshift-tests-private % oc -n openshift-ingress logs gateway-openshift-default-77859fb5cc-6dff2 -c istio-proxy | grep termination
terminationDrainDuration: 5s

since unit and e2e tests pass, the name change to buildGatewayClassesConfig is valid

/verified by @rhamini3

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-05-29T17:11:45Z

@rhamini3: This PR has been marked as verified by @rhamini3.

Details

In response to this:

marking bug as verified

confirmed the gateway deployment contains terminationMessagePolicy: FallbackToLogsOnError and gateway pod logs does not if it is healthy
% oc -n openshift-ingress get deployment gateway-openshift-default -o yaml | grep termination
       terminationMessagePath: /dev/termination-log
       terminationMessagePolicy: FallbackToLogsOnError
     terminationGracePeriodSeconds: 30
iamin@iamin-mac openshift-tests-private % oc -n openshift-ingress logs gateway-openshift-default-77859fb5cc-6dff2 -c istio-proxy | grep termination
terminationDrainDuration: 5s
since unit and e2e tests pass, the name change to buildGatewayClassesConfig is valid

/verified by @rhamini3

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 · 2026-05-29T17:15:27Z

@gcs278: Jira Issue Verification Checks: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-84491
✔️ 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-84491 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:

Summary

Extends the Istio gatewayclass customization to include a deployment overlay that sets terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the istio-proxy container, satisfying the OCP platform policy enforced by the termination-message-policy monitor test.

Renames buildHorizontalPodAutoscalerConfig to buildGatewayClassesConfig since it now builds all per-gatewayclass overlays (HPA + deployment).

Adds an E2E assertion in ensureGatewayObjectSuccess to verify the policy is applied.

Test plan

Unit tests pass (go test ./pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/...)

E2E: TestGatewayAPI verifies terminationMessagePolicy=FallbackToLogsOnError on the gateway proxy deployment

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

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 Bot requested review from candita, frobware and melvinjoseph86 May 1, 2026 14:05

coderabbitai Bot reviewed May 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

gcs278 force-pushed the OCPBUGS-84491-termination-message-policy branch from c411daf to 4a97fc4 Compare May 1, 2026 14:30

coderabbitai Bot reviewed May 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

gcs278 force-pushed the OCPBUGS-84491-termination-message-policy branch from 4a97fc4 to 65ca117 Compare May 1, 2026 15:51

coderabbitai Bot reviewed May 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread test/e2e/util_gatewayapi_test.go

openshift-ci Bot assigned rikatz May 5, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 5, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 5, 2026

gcs278 force-pushed the OCPBUGS-84491-termination-message-policy branch from 65ca117 to da0bcdf Compare May 5, 2026 23:12

openshift-ci Bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 5, 2026

coderabbitai Bot reviewed May 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/operator/controller/gatewayclass/istio_sail_installer.go

openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 6, 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 May 6, 2026

rikatz mentioned this pull request May 7, 2026

OCPBUGS-55050: Remove resources limits from Gateway API proxy containers #1440

Closed

openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 21, 2026

gcs278 force-pushed the OCPBUGS-84491-termination-message-policy branch from da0bcdf to be0d93e Compare May 21, 2026 14:13

openshift-ci Bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 21, 2026

rikatz reviewed May 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci Bot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels May 25, 2026

gcs278 force-pushed the OCPBUGS-84491-termination-message-policy branch from be0d93e to 59010aa Compare May 26, 2026 13:34

openshift-ci Bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 26, 2026

openshift-ci Bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels May 26, 2026

openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label May 29, 2026

openshift-merge-bot Bot merged commit df9e25a into openshift:master May 29, 2026
20 checks passed

Uh oh!

Conversation

gcs278 commented May 1, 2026

Summary

Test plan

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented May 1, 2026

Summary

Test plan

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviews paused

Walkthrough

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings, 1 inconclusive)

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Miciah commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

melvinjoseph86 commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 6, 2026

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 21, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 21, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz May 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gcs278 May 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 27, 2026

Uh oh!

gcs278 commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

rikatz commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

rhamini3 commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented May 29, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented May 29, 2026

Summary

Test plan

Uh oh!

Reviewers

coderabbitai Bot commented May 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gcs278 commented May 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gcs278 commented May 21, 2026 •

edited

Loading