-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CRI: clarify Mount.host_path
docs
#127920
CRI: clarify Mount.host_path
docs
#127920
Conversation
Mount.host_path
docsMount.host_path
docs
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: saschagrunert 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
2b79c89
to
8a43496
Compare
Mount.host_path
docsMount.host_path
docs
// Path of the mount on the host. Can be empty if the image field below is | ||
// provided. If the host path doesn't exist and image is nil, then runtimes | ||
// should report an error. If the hostpath is a symbolic link, runtimes | ||
// should follow the symlink and mount the real destination to container. | ||
string host_path = 2; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If they can't be used together, it's better to mention that host_path and the following image are mutually exclusive.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO, they represent different volume sources.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Updated the doc comment as suggested.
Mention that the `host_path` can be empty if image volumes are being used. Signed-off-by: Sascha Grunert <sgrunert@redhat.com>
8a43496
to
ce9351c
Compare
/test pull-kubernetes-integration |
/triage accepted |
LGTM looking forward to others' review |
/lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: b4c1aa289838e15fcfbaf5b9276070eb94b13b43
|
What type of PR is this?
/kind documentation
What this PR does / why we need it:
Mention that the
host_path
can be empty if image volumes are being used.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
None
Special notes for your reviewer:
PTAL @kubernetes/sig-node-pr-reviews
cc @carlory
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: