KEP-2254: Target sig-node cgroupv2 KEP to GA in 1.25

[bobbypage]

Signed-off-by: David Porter [email protected]

• One-line PR description: Target sig-node cgroupv2 KEP to GA in 1.25

• Update the KEP.yaml
• Update based on the new KEP template and added testing info

• Issue link: cgroup v2 #2254

• Other comments:

[bobbypage]

/assign @mrunalp

[mrunalp]

/lgtm

[bobbypage]

/assign @derekwaynecarr

[mrunalp]

@derekwaynecarr for approval

[derekwaynecarr]

/approve
/lgtm

[bobbypage]

/assign @johnbelamaric

for PRR

[johnbelamaric]

/approve

Would there be value in making it visible in the Node status that the node is using cgroup v2?

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bobbypage, derekwaynecarr, johnbelamaric

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 [johnbelamaric]
• keps/sig-node/OWNERS [derekwaynecarr,johnbelamaric]

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

[ReillyBrogan]

Would there be value in making it visible in the Node status that the node is using cgroup v2?

Yes, I think so. It might be a good candidate for a node label so that pods can target pure v1, pure v2, or hybrid mode v1/v2. Some applications that expect an older setup could experience issues if a node is pure v2. Applications using Java 8 or Java 11 <= 11.0.16 for example don't accurately detect CPU/memory limits when ran on v2-only systems.

[bobbypage]

Thanks @johnbelamaric for reviewing.

@ReillyBrogan Regarding exposing cgroup version in node status, that's a good idea and we should discuss it further. Let's move discussion to the parent issue so it does not get lost in this PR :)