Add workload aware preemption by Argh4k · Pull Request #137606 · kubernetes/kubernetes

Argh4k · 2026-03-10T11:22:01Z

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR implements workload aware preemption from KEP-5710.

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

This PR builds on top of two PRs: #136577 and #137562. Changes done in this PR starts with the Extend executor to work with pod groups commit

I am still actively extending test coverage for it.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

When WorkloadAwarePreemption Feature Gate is enabled, and the Pod Group scheduling fails to find a place for the Pod Group, instead of running default preemption for each pod from the pod group, the workload aware preemption will be run for the whole group.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

[KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-scheduling/5710-workload-aware-preemption)

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-10T11:22:10Z

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Details

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.

Argh4k · 2026-03-10T11:32:28Z

/area workload-aware

tosi3k

Initial pass - I didn't go through the last 4 commits since I need to switch context to another review.

tosi3k · 2026-03-10T15:54:55Z

+// ExecutorPreemptor is an interface that represents a preemptor.
+// It's mainly used to abstrac away fields needed for logging
+// purposes during preemption calls done by Executor.
+type ExecutorPreemptor interface {


Can't we extend the already existing Preemptor interface defined in types.go instead?

Feels as if we define gazillion additional receiver methods here that could be specified in the Preemptor interface in the first place.

The problem is that Preemptor has more data in it, like CycleState for pods, which we do not need. This would force us to pass unnecessary data. Overall I would prefer to have this interface as an unimported internal only helper for unifying pod/pod group path, but Preempt method is also replaced in integration tests that are defined in other package.

dom4ha

Overall LGTM without tests yet

dom4ha · 2026-03-19T16:54:00Z

+		}
+	}
+
+	victimsToPreempt = append(victimsToPreempt, nonViolatingVictims...)


The code is no longer there, so resolving

sanposhiho

Mostly LGTM on the implementation side, left some small ones only. As discussed at sig meeting, I leave the testing part for other reviewers.

wojtek-t

Overall this LGTM modulo the last comment about externalizing the plugin interface.

macsko

Reviewed the scheduler's core code and integration tests. Preemption code is still waiting my review

macsko

Finished the review of the entire PR. Mostly sent smaller comments or nits, so you can consider applying some of them in a follow-up PR if that's easier for you

macsko · 2026-03-22T13:13:47Z

+	}
+}
+
+func TestFilterVictimsWithPDBViolation(t *testing.T) {


Is it possible to verify in the tests whether filterVictimsWithPDBViolation works similar to the filterPodsWithPDBViolation?

The problem is that filterPodsWithPDBViolation is in defaultpreemption package.

I think that for 1.37 we will unify this path as we need to handle pod group victims in pod by pod scenario, so the tests will also be unified.

tosi3k · 2026-03-23T16:03:03Z

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-kind

macsko · 2026-03-23T16:09:17Z

PR looks good, let's merge it!
/lgtm
/approve

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-23T16:09:25Z

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: da5473bf6663f26367d982e8cc089c9ccd78d101

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-23T16:09:36Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Argh4k, macsko

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:

~~pkg/scheduler/OWNERS~~ [macsko]
~~staging/src/k8s.io/kube-scheduler/OWNERS~~ [macsko]
~~test/integration/scheduler/OWNERS~~ [macsko]

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

tosi3k · 2026-03-23T16:11:26Z

/woof

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-23T16:11:29Z

@tosi3k:

Details

In response to this:

/woof

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.

macsko · 2026-03-23T16:12:55Z

/milestone v1.36
Based on the exception approval: kubernetes/enhancements#5710 (comment)

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-23T16:19:30Z

@Argh4k: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-csi-serial	`b16287a`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-csi-serial`
pull-kubernetes-e2e-storage-kind-vac	`b16287a`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-storage-kind-vac`
pull-kubernetes-e2e-storage-kind-disruptive	`b16287a`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-storage-kind-disruptive`
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-storage-slow	`b16287a`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-storage-slow`
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-storage-snapshot	`b16287a`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-storage-snapshot`
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-1-7-dra	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-1-7-dra`
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-2-0-dra-alpha-beta-features	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-2-0-dra-alpha-beta-features`
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-2-0-dra	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd-2-0-dra`
pull-kubernetes-kind-dra	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra`
pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-1	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-1`
pull-kubernetes-dra-integration	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-dra-integration`
pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-all	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-all`
pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-3	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-3`
pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-2	`5dc6427`	link	false	`/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-n-2`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

macsko · 2026-03-23T16:25:50Z

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-03-23T16:25:58Z

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: e3fd7d5f3be12551724d8e931a2d2eaaebf18fb9

tosi3k · 2026-03-23T17:07:08Z

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

k8s-ci-robot added needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 10, 2026

k8s-ci-robot requested review from ania-borowiec and damemi March 10, 2026 11:22

k8s-ci-robot added area/test sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. labels Mar 10, 2026

github-project-automation Bot added this to SIG Scheduling Mar 10, 2026

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. label Mar 10, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this to Needs Triage in SIG Scheduling Mar 10, 2026

k8s-ci-robot added the area/workload-aware Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to Workload-aware and Topology-aware scheduling subprojects. label Mar 10, 2026

github-project-automation Bot added this to Workload-aware & Topology-aware Workstream Mar 10, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this to Backlog in Workload-aware & Topology-aware Workstream Mar 10, 2026

This was referenced Mar 10, 2026

Abstract preemption algorithm to work on preemptor and domains #136577

Closed

Reprieve using binary search optimisation for workload aware preemption #137438

Open

whtssub mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2026

Workload-aware preemption kubernetes/enhancements#5710

Open

7 tasks

tosi3k reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

tosi3k moved this from Needs Triage to 1st Reviewer In Progress in SIG Scheduling Mar 11, 2026

tosi3k mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2026

Add tosi3k to the SIG Scheduling reviewers #137630

Merged

Argh4k force-pushed the workload-preemption-v1alpha2 branch from ddd7efb to 2f3e7bb Compare March 11, 2026 11:51

k8s-ci-robot added needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. labels Mar 11, 2026

wojtek-t reviewed Mar 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/preemption/podgrouppreemption.go

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/defaultpreemption/default_preemption.go Outdated

dom4ha reviewed Mar 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

sanposhiho reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/defaultpreemption/default_preemption.go Outdated

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one_podgroup.go Outdated

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one_podgroup.go Outdated

tosi3k reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/preemption/types.go Outdated

tosi3k reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/preemption/podgrouppreemption.go Outdated

wojtek-t reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread staging/src/k8s.io/kube-scheduler/framework/interface.go Outdated

wojtek-t reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

tosi3k reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/framework/preemption/podgrouppreemption_test.go Outdated

sanposhiho reviewed Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one_podgroup.go Outdated

macsko reviewed Mar 22, 2026

View reviewed changes

Argh4k added 2 commits March 23, 2026 12:30

Allow cycle state to skip all post filter plugins

1382c96

Add option to backup and restore node info snapshot

0218e0d

macsko reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one_podgroup.go

macsko reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one.go Outdated

macsko reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one.go Outdated

macsko reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread pkg/scheduler/schedule_one.go Outdated

Add pod group preemption

1f15743

Conversation

Argh4k commented Mar 10, 2026

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Argh4k commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

tosi3k left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

tosi3k Mar 10, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Argh4k Mar 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dom4ha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dom4ha Mar 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sanposhiho left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

wojtek-t left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

macsko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

macsko left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

macsko left a comment •

edited

Loading

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading