scheduler: call Initialize() and UnInitialize() in action lifecycle by aadhil2k4 · Pull Request #5069 · volcano-sh/volcano

aadhil2k4 · 2026-03-02T05:54:44Z

What type of PR is this?

bugfix

What this PR does / why we need it:

Currently, scheduler actions only invoke Execute() during a scheduling cycle.
Initialize() and UnInitialize() are defined in the Action interface but are called only in unit tests and never in production code.
This change ensures every scheduler follows its full lifecycle - Initialize(), Execute(), UnInitialize().

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #5052

Special notes for your reviewer:

NONE

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

gemini-code-assist · 2026-03-02T05:54:54Z

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request resolves a critical bug in the scheduler where action lifecycle methods, Initialize() and UnInitialize(), were not being called during normal operation. By integrating these calls into the runOnce() function, the change guarantees that all scheduler actions adhere to their intended full lifecycle, improving robustness and preventing potential resource leaks or uninitialized states.

Highlights

Scheduler Action Lifecycle: Ensured that scheduler actions now correctly invoke Initialize() before execution and UnInitialize() after execution, completing their full lifecycle.
Bug Fix: Addressed a bug where Initialize() and UnInitialize() methods of scheduler actions were only called in unit tests and not in production code.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go
- Modified the runOnce function to include calls to Initialize() and UnInitialize() for each scheduler action.

Activity

The pull request was created by aadhil2k4 to address issue scheduler: initialize and uninitialize are not called in the codebase #5052.
No further review comments or activities have been recorded yet.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	`/gemini review`	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	`/gemini summary`	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	`/gemini help`	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request correctly implements the full lifecycle for scheduler actions by ensuring Initialize() and UnInitialize() are called around Execute(). This is a good fix that aligns the implementation with the Action interface definition. I've added one suggestion to make the implementation slightly more concise and readable by grouping the lifecycle calls within a single anonymous function.

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

Copilot

Pull request overview

Ensures scheduler actions follow their full lifecycle during each scheduling cycle by invoking Initialize(), Execute(), and UnInitialize() in production (not only in unit tests), addressing #5052.

Changes:

Call Initialize() before executing each scheduler action.
Ensure UnInitialize() is invoked after each action execution via defer.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

hajnalmt

Thanks for the PR!
Can you align with @devzizu in the original issue or here please? You have completely different lifecycle assumptions than him about the introduction of these functions, and I lean towards his way.

I want to mention that the implementation is not easy on this if we move on to the scheduler's lifetime path. Because you need to account for hot-reload as on config reload pc.actions gets replaced with fresh instances, so you need to prevent the old actions' workers to leak.

hajnalmt · 2026-03-02T16:33:36Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

+// ensuring Initialize() is called before Execute() and UnInitialize()
+// is deferred for guaranteed cleanup after execution.
+func (pc *Scheduler) executeAction(action framework.Action, ssn *framework.Session) {
+	func() {


Why do we have this unnecessary anonymous function wrapper here? It doesn't do anything.

hajnalmt · 2026-03-03T10:28:04Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

+// is deferred for guaranteed cleanup after execution.
+func (pc *Scheduler) executeAction(action framework.Action, ssn *framework.Session) {
+	func() {
+		action.Initialize()


We have a conflicting lifecycle assumptions here. The way devzizu imagined this at L827 is that Initialize() and UnInitialize() will be called once for the scheduler's lifetime (start/shutdown), not per-cycle.

I think I agree with him, since session is not an argument of this function the initial design thought should have been to call it only once. We have OpenSession and CloseSession to adhere for a session level lifecycle.

Indeed, the absence of session as a parameter to Initialize()/UnInitialize() is a good signal that they were designed for scheduler-lifetime scope, not per-cycle. Per-cycle setup already has its natural place, i.e. Execute(ssn) itself, or OnSessionOpen/OnSessionClose on the plugin side (which do receive the session).

As @hajnalmt is stating, calling them per-cycle would also conflict with the async worker design proposed in #5033, since workers are meant to run for the scheduler's lifetime.

@aadhil2k4 @hajnalmt, I suggest we move the logic to https://github.com/volcano-sh/volcano/blob/master/pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go#L91? There, we can iterate over the actions and call Initialize(), while UnInitialize() can be called by consuming stopCh?

I donot see any action implement Initialize now.

@hzxuzhonghu
This is needed for devzizu here currently we don't have a way for the actions to gracefully initilize and unitilize workers spawned by any action. We decided to do this separately because we need to support this I think.

ACK, i agree with only calling init/unInit once liftime rather than per cycle

aadhil2k4 · 2026-03-09T17:59:20Z

Hi!! I was occupied last week and couldnt check on this. I'll implement the changes and let you know.

- Calls Initialize() once on scheduler startup and calls UnInitialize() once on scheduler shutdown via stopCh. - Updated tests to match this new lifecycle change. Signed-off-by: Aadhil Ahamed <aadhil2k4@gmail.com>

volcano-sh-bot · 2026-03-10T19:24:01Z

[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 assign k82cn for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

pkg/scheduler/OWNERS

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

aadhil2k4 · 2026-03-10T19:36:02Z

@hajnalmt @devzizu I have moved the lifecycle handling from per-cycle execution to the scheduler lifetime as discussed.
Please confirm if this implementation looks correct? If so, I’ll proceed with implementing the hot-reload handling.

- Unintialize old actions and Initialize newly loaded actions when the scheduler configuration is reloaded. Signed-off-by: Aadhil Ahamed <aadhil2k4@gmail.com>

devzizu · 2026-03-16T08:25:45Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

 }

+// Initialize all configured actions once.
+func (pc *Scheduler) initActions() {


It looks like initActions() is defined but only called in the tests, and could be called in Run() as well right?

Additionally, I believe we should separate concerns between loadSchedulerConf and Run(), but let me know what you think here:

Keep loadSchedulerConf doing only what it does today (parse + swap).

Run() can call initActions() explicitly after the first loadSchedulerConf().

watchSchedulerConf (hot-reload path) explicitly calls UnInitialize() on old actions and Initialize() on new ones before swapping them into pc.actions under the mutex, so runOnce() never sees uninitialized actions.

hzxuzhonghu · 2026-03-17T01:33:09Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

+func (pc *Scheduler) initActions() {
+	pc.mutex.Lock()
+	actions := pc.actions
+	pc.mutex.Unlock()
+	for _, action := range actions {
+		action.Initialize()
+	}
+}
+
+// Uninitialize all configured actions.
+func (pc *Scheduler) cleanupActions() {


move to test file if only needed there and no need to make it as method of Scheduler

hzxuzhonghu · 2026-03-17T01:37:16Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

 	var err error
 	if !pc.disableDefaultConf {
 		pc.once.Do(func() {
 			pc.actions, pc.plugins, pc.configurations, pc.metricsConf, err = UnmarshalSchedulerConf(DefaultSchedulerConf)


donot we need to call init for these actions too?

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings March 2, 2026 05:54

volcano-sh-bot requested review from lowang-bh and shinytang6 March 2, 2026 05:54

volcano-sh-bot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 2, 2026

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of aadhil2k4 March 2, 2026 05:55 View session

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Mar 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Copilot AI reviewed Mar 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go Show resolved Hide resolved

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

volcano-sh-bot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 2, 2026

aadhil2k4 force-pushed the issue_5052 branch from 4177475 to c1c558e Compare March 2, 2026 07:21

volcano-sh-bot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 2, 2026

aadhil2k4 force-pushed the issue_5052 branch from c1c558e to 5a3b2cb Compare March 2, 2026 07:29

volcano-sh-bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 2, 2026

aadhil2k4 force-pushed the issue_5052 branch from 5a3b2cb to cb469fe Compare March 2, 2026 07:33

hajnalmt suggested changes Mar 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

volcano-sh-bot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 10, 2026

scheduler: move action lifecycle to scheduler's lifetime

3bf7776

- Calls Initialize() once on scheduler startup and calls UnInitialize() once on scheduler shutdown via stopCh. - Updated tests to match this new lifecycle change. Signed-off-by: Aadhil Ahamed <aadhil2k4@gmail.com>

aadhil2k4 force-pushed the issue_5052 branch from c2322a8 to 3bf7776 Compare March 10, 2026 19:23

volcano-sh-bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 10, 2026

scheduler: handle action lifecycle during config hot-reload.

82f528a

- Unintialize old actions and Initialize newly loaded actions when the scheduler configuration is reloaded. Signed-off-by: Aadhil Ahamed <aadhil2k4@gmail.com>

aadhil2k4 requested review from devzizu and hajnalmt March 14, 2026 13:52

devzizu reviewed Mar 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

hzxuzhonghu reviewed Mar 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

aadhil2k4 commented Mar 2, 2026

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot commented Mar 2, 2026

Summary of Changes

Highlights

Footnotes

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

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

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

devzizu Mar 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aadhil2k4 commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

volcano-sh-bot commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

aadhil2k4 commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

hajnalmt left a comment •

edited

Loading

devzizu Mar 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading