OCPBUGS-90520: UPSTREAM: 140211: Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5

[arkadeepsen]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

The bug was reported upstream in kubernetes#139873. The fix needed a change in the server code in the regression-issue-74839 image. This fix needed 3 separate PRs:

• Use 4-tuple to track connections to fix conntrack test flakes kubernetes/kubernetes#139874
• Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 kubernetes/k8s.io#9677
• Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 kubernetes/kubernetes#140211

This PR is only a cherry-pick of kubernetes#140211 as that's the PR which actually fixes the bug. The changes in kubernetes#139874 can be brought in through the rebase process itself.

$ git cherry-pick 843c638b85252acdc50b0287a79be5d493a16d42

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Adjusted SYN/ACK pending-state matching in the probe logic to ensure the expected injected “boom!!!” behavior is correlated correctly.
  • Updated the regression test image to version 1.5 to keep the suite aligned with current expected artifacts.
• Chores
  • Bumped the internal regression image version reference from 1.4 to 1.5.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-90520, 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)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (core-networking-bot@redhat.com), skipping review request.

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

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Promotes regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 downstream only so that the fix can be tested first in downstream and then taken to upstream.

Cherry-picked fix from upstream PR kubernetes#139874 by @mkowalski

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

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]

@arkadeepsen: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

• 43b8327|Use 4-tuple to track connections to fix conntrack test flakes: does not specify an upstream backport in the commit message
• 6a4b5c3|UPSTREAM: : Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5: does not specify an upstream backport in the commit message

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This change updates the version tag for the RegressionIssue74839 test image configuration from 1.4 to 1.5 within the initImageConfigs function in the test utilities image manifest.

Changes

Test Image Configuration Update

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Image version tag update test/utils/image/manifest.go	The configs[RegressionIssue74839] version tag is updated from 1.4 to 1.5 in initImageConfigs.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Related PRs: None identified.

Suggested labels: test, size/XS

Suggested reviewers: None identified.

Poem
A rabbit hops through version lines so small,
One digit changed, that's really all,
From 1.4 to 1.5 it leaps with cheer,
A tiny tag bump, nothing to fear.
Off to test the manifest anew — hop, hop, hooray! 🐇

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 14 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (14 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
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	Only an image version tag changed in manifest.go; no Ginkgo test titles were added or modified.
Test Structure And Quality	✅ Passed	PASS: PR only changes image version metadata in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no Ginkgo test blocks or cluster-interaction logic are affected.
Microshift Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	Only a test image version bump in manifest.go; no Ginkgo tests or MicroShift-unsupported APIs were added.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	Only an image version bump in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no new or modified Ginkgo e2e tests, so SNO compatibility check is not applicable.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	The PR only bumps an e2e test image tag in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no manifests, replicas, affinities, nodeSelectors, or topology logic changed.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract	✅ Passed	Only a version tag changed in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no stdout writes or suite/main/init code were added.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	Only a manifest image tag bump in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no new Ginkgo tests, IPv4 assumptions, or external connectivity were introduced.
No-Weak-Crypto	✅ Passed	Diff only bumps regression-issue-74839 from 1.4 to 1.5; no weak crypto, custom crypto, or secret comparisons were added.
Container-Privileges	✅ Passed	Only change is an image tag bump in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no privileged/hostPID/hostNetwork/hostIPC/allowPrivilegeEscalation/SYS_ADMIN settings were added.
No-Sensitive-Data-In-Logs	✅ Passed	PASS: The only change is an image tag update in test/utils/image/manifest.go; no logging or sensitive-data handling was added.
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the only code change: promoting regression-issue-74839 to version 1.5.

✨ 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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: arkadeepsen
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign benluddy for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• DOWNSTREAM_OWNERS

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

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-90520, 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)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (core-networking-bot@redhat.com), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Promotes regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 downstream only so that the fix can be tested first in downstream and then taken to upstream.

Cherry-picked fix from upstream PR kubernetes#139874 by @mkowalski

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
• Updated a regression test image to the latest version, keeping the test suite aligned with current behavior.
• Chores
• Bumped an internal image version reference from 1.4 to 1.5.

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]

@arkadeepsen: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated.

The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:

• 42201d7|UPSTREAM: 139874: Use 4-tuple to track connections to fix conntrack test flakes: the upstream PR kubernetes/kubernetes#139874 has not yet merged
• 6392eb0|UPSTREAM: : Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5: does not specify an upstream backport in the commit message

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-90520, 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)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (core-networking-bot@redhat.com), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Promotes regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 downstream only so that the fix can be tested first in downstream and then taken to upstream.

Cherry-picked fix from upstream PR kubernetes#139874 by @mkowalski

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
• Adjusted SYN/ACK pending-state matching in the probe logic to ensure the expected injected “boom!!!” behavior is correlated correctly.
• Updated the regression test image to version 1.5 to keep the suite aligned with current expected artifacts.
• Chores
• Bumped the internal regression image version reference from 1.4 to 1.5.

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.

[jubittajohn]

/retest

[jubittajohn]

@arkadeepsen Could we hold off on this PR until the Kube rebase is merged? We're likely targeting sometime next week for the Kube rebase changes to land, and we'd prefer to avoid additional code churn until that's complete.

[arkadeepsen]

@arkadeepsen Could we hold off on this PR until the Kube rebase is merged? We're likely targeting sometime next week for the Kube rebase changes to land, and we'd prefer to avoid additional code churn until that's complete.

Sure @jubittajohn. In the meantime I'll get all the necessary upstream PRs merged to publish the registry.k8s.io/e2e-test-images/regression-issue-74839:1.5 image.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: the contents of this pull request could be automatically validated.

The following commits are valid:

• acf7a76|UPSTREAM: 140211: Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5: the upstream PR kubernetes/kubernetes#140211 has merged

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-90520, 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)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (core-networking-bot@redhat.com), skipping review request.

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Promotes regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 downstream only so that the fix can be tested first in downstream and then taken to upstream.

Cherry-picked fix from upstream PR kubernetes#139874 by @mkowalski

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
• Updated an included image version to a newer release for improved consistency.

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.

[arkadeepsen]

/hold

until #2653 is merged

[jubittajohn]

/test all

[jubittajohn]

/retest

[jubittajohn]

/retest

[arkadeepsen]

/retest

[jubittajohn]

/test all

[arkadeepsen]

/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6

[arkadeepsen]

/retest

[arkadeepsen]

/retest

[jubittajohn]

/test all
(Retesting to capture presubmit job signals to support the Kube rebase)

[arkadeepsen]

/hold cancel

#2653 has merged

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: the contents of this pull request could be automatically validated.

The following commits are valid:

• d178a1d|UPSTREAM: 140211: Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5: the upstream PR kubernetes/kubernetes#140211 has merged

Comment /validate-backports to re-evaluate validity of the upstream PRs, for example when they are merged upstream.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@arkadeepsen: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-90520, 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)

No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Jira (core-networking-bot@redhat.com), skipping review request.

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

Details

In response to this:

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

The bug was reported upstream in kubernetes#139873. The fix needed a change in the server code in the regression-issue-74839 image. This fix needed 3 separate PRs:

• Use 4-tuple to track connections to fix conntrack test flakes kubernetes/kubernetes#139874
• Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 kubernetes/k8s.io#9677
• Promote regression-issue-74839 to 1.5 kubernetes/kubernetes#140211

This PR is only a cherry-pick of kubernetes#140211 as that's the PR which actually fixes the bug. The changes in kubernetes#139874 can be brought in through the rebase process itself.

$ git cherry-pick 843c638b85252acdc50b0287a79be5d493a16d42

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
• Adjusted SYN/ACK pending-state matching in the probe logic to ensure the expected injected “boom!!!” behavior is correlated correctly.
• Updated the regression test image to version 1.5 to keep the suite aligned with current expected artifacts.
• Chores
• Bumped the internal regression image version reference from 1.4 to 1.5.

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.

[arkadeepsen]

/retest

[arkadeepsen]

/retest

[arkadeepsen]

/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial-2of2

[arkadeepsen]

/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial-2of2

[openshift-ci]

@arkadeepsen: 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-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial-2of2	d178a1d	link	false	/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview-serial-2of2

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.