KEP-2876: Promote CRD Validation Expression Language to Beta

[cici37]

• One-line PR description: Promote CRD Validation Expression Language to Beta

• Issue link: CRD Validation Expression Language #2876

• Other comments:

[cici37]

cc @jpbetz

[jpbetz]

This looks right. We're on track for beta in 1.25 according to the plan recorded in the KEP.

[jpbetz]

/assign @deads2k
/cc @liggitt

[liggitt]

are there any items in the list of remaining work that need to be reflected here as alpha → beta graduation criteria? thinking specifically of any of the optimization work need to avoid super-linear complexity growth (especially around deeper CRDs with repeatedly computing nested expressions)

[cici37]

are there any items in the list of remaining work that need to be reflected here as alpha → beta graduation criteria? thinking specifically of any of the optimization work need to avoid super-linear complexity growth (especially around deeper CRDs with repeatedly computing nested expressions)

Thanks for pointing out, I have added this into beta graduation criteria^

[liggitt]

one question on the e2e test of enablement/disablement, lgtm otherwise

[cici37]

@liggitt Would you mind to take a look when have time? Wondering if we could get it merged ^^

[liggitt]

sorry, didn't know this was waiting on me.
/lgtm

[cici37]

/assign @deads2k
for final approval.
Would you mind to take a look when you have time? Thank you 😊

[kikisdeliveryservice]

As a small reminder, we have updated our KEP template Test Plan section this enhancement is using the previous version. Please be sure to update relevant sections for acceptance into the release. :)

[deads2k]

It looks like the ### Troubleshooting section is missing some answers. In particular, the ###### What steps should be taken if SLOs are not being met to determine the problem? section probably ought to be clear on how to determine which particular expression is costly or failing. How to mitigate, and whether it means disabling the entire feature.

Otherwise, this looks fine to me.

[cici37]

@deads2k I have updated Troubleshooting section. Would you mind to take a look when have time? Thank you

[deads2k]

is there a metric for this and is it per-resource or just in aggregate?

[cici37]

We have added a cost limit per-resource and a cost limit per expression as well. Ref: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-api-machinery/2876-crd-validation-expression-language/README.md#resource-constraints

[deads2k]

Thanks, looks good.

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cici37, deads2k

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• keps/prod-readiness/OWNERS [deads2k]
• keps/sig-api-machinery/OWNERS [deads2k]

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