SPLAT-2827: Added vSphere failure domain to vcenter check

[vr4manta]

SPLAT-2827

Changes

• Added checks to vCenter infrastructure spec to make sure that all failure domains have a vCenter configured int he vCenters section

Notes

These changes are being gated behind the VSphereMultiVCenterDay2 feature gate

[openshift-merge-bot]

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]

@vr4manta: This pull request references SPLAT-2827 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "5.0.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

SPLAT-2827

Changes

• Added checks to vCenter infrastructure spec to make sure that all failure domains have a vCenter configured int he vCenters section

Notes

These changes are being gated behind the VSphereMultiVCenterDay2 feature gate

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]

Hello @vr4manta! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

[coderabbitai]

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

Added a feature-gated vSphere validation rule requiring every non-empty failure domain to reference a configured vCenter with the same server value. Propagated the rule to infrastructure and controller configuration CRD manifests. Added create and update test cases for matching, missing, removed, shared, and case-mismatched server references. Updated existing vSphere network fixtures and added an AGENTS.md reference to CLAUDE.md.

Suggested reviewers: sinnykumari, joelspeed

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 15

✅ Passed checks (15 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title is concise and accurately summarizes the main change: adding a vSphere failure domain to vCenter validation.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is clearly related to the change and correctly mentions the vCenter/failure domain validation and feature gate.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
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	Added test titles are fixed, descriptive strings; no dynamic values, timestamps, UUIDs, IPs, or generated names appear in the titles.
Test Structure And Quality	✅ Passed	Fixture-only YAML tests follow existing one-scenario-per-case style; no Ginkgo blocks, cluster ops, or timeout/cleanup concerns are introduced.
Microshift Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	No new Ginkgo e2e tests were added; the PR only changes CRD schema/validation fixtures, so the MicroShift test check is not applicable.
Single Node Openshift (Sno) Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	No new Ginkgo e2e tests were added; the PR only changes YAML schema fixtures and generated CRDs, so SNO-specific test compatibility is not applicable.
Topology-Aware Scheduling Compatibility	✅ Passed	Only vSphere CRD/CEL validation changes were added; no pod scheduling, replica, affinity, or topology-aware controller code was modified.
Ote Binary Stdout Contract	✅ Passed	No process-level stdout writes were added; the PR only changes validation annotations, CRD manifests, and YAML test fixtures.
Ipv6 And Disconnected Network Test Compatibility	✅ Passed	PR adds CRD validation and declarative YAML fixtures only; no new Ginkgo e2e tests, IPv4-only logic, or public internet connectivity were found.
No-Weak-Crypto	✅ Passed	Scanned all touched files; no MD5/SHA1/DES/RC4/ECB, crypto imports, or secret-comparison code. Changes are validation annotations and YAML tests only.
Container-Privileges	✅ Passed	Changed files are CRD/tests only; no privileged, hostPID/Network/IPC, SYS_ADMIN, allowPrivilegeEscalation, or runAsRoot fields were found.
No-Sensitive-Data-In-Logs	✅ Passed	No added logging or print statements were found in the changed files; the PR only adds schema validation and test fixtures, not runtime logs.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 5

🤖 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
`@payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml`:
- Around line 1096-1099: The validation rule near the failure-domain/vCenter
message currently permits configurations with failureDomains but no vcenters;
update it so vcenters is required whenever failureDomains is configured, while
preserving the check that every failure domain matches a vcenter.server entry.

In
`@payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml`:
- Around line 1096-1099: Update the CEL validation rule for failureDomains in
both
payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1096-1099
and
payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1111-1114
so every configured failure domain requires vcenters to be present and include a
matching server; remove the !has(self.vcenters) short-circuit, then regenerate
the corresponding CRDs.

In
`@payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml`:
- Around line 1111-1114: Update the failure-domain validation rule in both
listed SelfManagedHA CRD files at the specified ranges so vcenters is required
whenever failureDomains is present before matching servers; regenerate the
generated CRDs to apply the corrected rule consistently.

In
`@payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml`:
- Around line 1403-1407: Update the failure-domain validation rule to reject
configurations where failureDomains is present without vcenters. Remove the
!has(self.vcenters) bypass while preserving validation that every failure domain
has a matching vCenter server.

In
`@payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml`:
- Around line 1388-1392: Update the CEL rule for the failureDomains/vcenters
validation in all four listed
CRDs—payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1388-1392,
payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1388-1392,
payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1403-1407,
and
payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml:1403-1407—so
failureDomains cannot bypass validation when vcenters is absent; remove the
!has(self.vcenters) short-circuit or explicitly require vcenters whenever
failureDomains is present, while preserving the matching-entry check.

🪄 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: ad3586cd-9c22-4c43-bedd-381ff9931a24

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1e68ae5 and f9b8721.

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (14)

• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• config/v1/zz_generated.featuregated-crd-manifests/infrastructures.config.openshift.io/VSphereMultiVCenterDay2.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.featuregated-crd-manifests/**
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.crd-manifests/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.crd-manifests/*
• machineconfiguration/v1/zz_generated.featuregated-crd-manifests/controllerconfigs.machineconfiguration.openshift.io/VSphereMultiVCenterDay2.yaml is excluded by !**/zz_generated.featuregated-crd-manifests/**

📒 Files selected for processing (16)

• CLAUDE.md
• CLAUDE.md
• config/v1/tests/infrastructures.config.openshift.io/VSphereMultiVCenterDay2.yaml
• config/v1/types_infrastructure.go
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_10_config-operator_01_infrastructures-SelfManagedHA-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-Hypershift-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-CustomNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-DevPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml
• payload-manifests/crds/0000_80_machine-config_01_controllerconfigs-SelfManagedHA-TechPreviewNoUpgrade.crd.yaml

[jcpowermac]

/verified by @jcpowermac via e2e testing

CSI storage in new failure domain should confirm vCenter removal blocked by existing xValidation, PV presence irrelevant (N-CSI-09) [real-vcenter, mutating, storage, p1]
/home/jcallen/Development/testing-day2-vcenter/test/e2e/csi_storage_test.go:455
  probing removal of vCenter vcenter-120.ci.ibmc.devcluster.openshift.com (hosts FD with PVs) via dry-run
  vCenter removal denied as expected: Infrastructure.config.openshift.io "cluster" is invalid: spec.platformSpec.vsphere: Invalid value: all failure domains must have a corresponding vCenter entry
  PV presence irrelevant — denial is based on FD reference to vCenter, not PV protection
  ...

https://github.com/jcpowermac/testing-day2-vcenter/blob/main/docs/tests/N-CSI-09.md

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jcpowermac: This PR has been marked as verified by @jcpowermac via e2e testing.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @jcpowermac via e2e testing

CSI storage in new failure domain should confirm vCenter removal blocked by existing xValidation, PV presence irrelevant (N-CSI-09) [real-vcenter, mutating, storage, p1]
/home/jcallen/Development/testing-day2-vcenter/test/e2e/csi_storage_test.go:455
 probing removal of vCenter vcenter-120.ci.ibmc.devcluster.openshift.com (hosts FD with PVs) via dry-run
 vCenter removal denied as expected: Infrastructure.config.openshift.io "cluster" is invalid: spec.platformSpec.vsphere: Invalid value: all failure domains must have a corresponding vCenter entry
 PV presence irrelevant — denial is based on FD reference to vCenter, not PV protection
 ...

https://github.com/jcpowermac/testing-day2-vcenter/blob/main/docs/tests/N-CSI-09.md

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.

[vr4manta]

/retest

[vr4manta]

/retest

[vr4manta]

It seems verify-hypershift-integration is failing for go import related issues that I believe are not caused by this PR.

[saschagrunert]

The has(self.vcenters) guard correctly rejects failureDomains when vcenters is absent, but there is no test for this path. Consider adding a test with failureDomains set and vcenters omitted entirely to cover this branch.

[vr4manta]

ok, i'll add a test.

[vr4manta]

/retest

[vr4manta]

@saschagrunert Updates are now ready for review.

[saschagrunert]

Two nits, otherwise LGTM. I see them as non-blocking and move it to the next stage.

• Consider a ratcheting test for when this gate is promoted to Default.
• The godoc in ungated manifests documents a constraint only enforced behind a gate. Decide whether that's acceptable or if a qualification is needed.

[vr4manta]

Two nits, otherwise LGTM. I see them as non-blocking and move it to the next stage.

• Consider a ratcheting test for when this gate is promoted to Default.

I'll look into making one of these.

• The godoc in ungated manifests documents a constraint only enforced behind a gate. Decide whether that's acceptable or if a qualification is needed.

I think this is fine. the constraint message is unchecked when not gated so it really won't impact anything. These issues have been around for ages and as part of our multi vcenter work, we are working on hardening this API to make sure it prevents issues.

[JoelSpeed]

/test api-review

[qodo-for-rh-openshift]

PR-Agent: could not find a component named api-review in a supported language in this PR.

[openshift-api-review-bot]

Now let me carefully review each change against the 7 rules.

Change 1: server field documentation (lines 1426-1428)

Added three lines documenting existing markers (MinLength=1, MaxLength=255) and the cross-field relationship (must match a vcenter entry). The MinLength and MaxLength constraints are now documented. The cross-field relationship is documented and enforced by the new XValidation rule at the struct level. This looks correct.

Change 2: New FeatureGateAwareXValidation on VSpherePlatformSpec (line 1663)

CEL rule: !has(self.failureDomains) || size(self.failureDomains) == 0 || (has(self.vcenters) && self.failureDomains.all(fd, self.vcenters.exists(vc, vc.server == fd.server)))

This is logically correct — it guards against missing/empty failureDomains, then checks that every failure domain's server matches a vcenter. The documentation on both the server field and failureDomains field describes this relationship, and the XValidation enforces it.

Change 3: failureDomains field documentation (line 1688)

Added "Each failure domain's server must match the server field of an entry in the vcenters list." to document the new XValidation rule. This is correct.

Change 4: zz_generated.swagger_doc_generated.go changes

These are generated documentation files that mirror the type comments. These are fine.

No issues found. All new documentation correctly describes the validation markers, the new CEL expression is logically sound, and the cross-field relationship between failureDomains and vcenters is both documented and enforced with an appropriate XValidation rule.

No issues found.

---

Run locally: claude -p "/api-review" from a clone of this PR.
Iterate locally before pushing — it's faster and doesn't use CI budget.

Job artifacts | Report a problem

[JoelSpeed]

/lgtm
/override ci/prow/verify-hypershift-integration

[openshift-ci]

@JoelSpeed: Overrode contexts on behalf of JoelSpeed: ci/prow/verify-hypershift-integration

Details

In response to this:

/lgtm
/override ci/prow/verify-hypershift-integration

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.

[openshift-merge-bot]

Scheduling tests matching the pipeline_run_if_changed or not excluded by pipeline_skip_if_only_changed parameters:
/test e2e-aws-ovn
/test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift
/test e2e-aws-ovn-hypershift-conformance
/test e2e-aws-ovn-techpreview
/test e2e-aws-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-2of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview-1of2
/test e2e-aws-serial-techpreview-2of2
/test e2e-azure
/test e2e-gcp
/test e2e-upgrade
/test e2e-upgrade-out-of-change
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn-techpreview
/test minor-e2e-upgrade-minor

[vr4manta]

/hold

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: JoelSpeed, saschagrunert

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 [JoelSpeed]

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

[openshift-ci]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.