AzureMachinePoolMachine: avoid setting FailureReason/FailureMessage

[mweibel]

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
Field will get deprecated in v1beta2, setting this currently avoids the Machine from being reconciled at all which does not make sense in this case because a Failed provisioningState is not necessarily terminal

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #5303

TODOs:

• squashed commits
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests
• cherry-pick candidate

Release note:

avoids marking an AzureMachinePoolMachine as terminal failure on provisioning failure. This ensures potential recovery from provisioning failure is handled correctly.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @mweibel. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 52.95%. Comparing base (8a1f692) to head (12ff489).
Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5558      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.94%   52.95%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         272      272              
  Lines       29525    29523       -2     
==========================================
+ Hits        15631    15633       +2     
+ Misses      13087    13083       -4     
  Partials      807      807              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[mboersma]

/ok-to-test

[mboersma]

@mweibel you may need to rebase this now that #5565 has merged to get the Netlify / docs tasks to pass. Sorry about that!

[mweibel]

@mboersma apologies for the delay - I was on vacation. Rebase is done 👍

[mweibel]

/retest

[mboersma]

/lgtm
/assign @nawazkh @willie-yao

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: d73e72e0df3ed93478cb511369cd15de9dceffb6

[willie-yao]

/lgtm
/approve

[nawazkh]

Just curious, when are we updating to v1beta2 ?
/hold

[nawazkh]

Also this PR seems to be related to my comment here #5537 (comment)

However, I agree we should be removing the steps to set the failure reason and failure message. But should that removal be in tandem with v1beta2 update ?

[willie-yao]

/approve cancel

Still lgtm but I want to address Nawaz's concerns first. Could be related to #5537 (comment)

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

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

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[mweibel]

Just curious, when are we updating to v1beta2 ?

That's a good question. But I think it also relates to the broader CAPI v1beta2 MP status.

There are quite a few missing changes in CAPI itself to make MPs ready for v1beta2 - see kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api#11947. There are not enough maintainers at the moment. I plan to step up a bit but my time at the moment is too limited unfortunately. I need to reorganize a few things first.

This change here is somewhat relevant to v1beta2 as for v1beta2 we don't have the FailureMessage/Reason fields anymore. However, this also just ensures for the current implementation that an AzureMachine is not marked as terminally failed when it is not actually the case.

[mweibel]

is there anything else I can do to make this move along?