fidzu : k8s

The PersistentVolume node affinity API dates back to Kubernetes v1.10. It is widely used to express that volumes may not be equally accessible by all nodes in the cluster. This field was previously immutable, and it is now mutable in Kubernetes v1.35 (alpha). This change opens a door to more flexible online volume management.

Why make node affinity mutable?

This raises an obvious question: why make node affinity mutable now? While stateless workloads like Deployments can be changed freely and the changes will be rolled out automatically by re-creating every Pod, PersistentVolumes (PVs) are stateful and cannot be re-created easily without losing data.

However, Storage providers evolve and storage requirements change. Most notably, multiple providers are offering regional disks now. Some of them even support live migration from zonal to regional disks, without disrupting the workloads. This change can be expressed through the VolumeAttributesClass API, which recently graduated to GA in 1.34. However, even if the volume is migrated to regional storage, Kubernetes still prevents scheduling Pods to other zones because of the node affinity recorded in the PV object. In this case, you may want to change the PV node affinity from:

spec:
 nodeAffinity:
 required:
 nodeSelectorTerms:
 - matchExpressions:
 - key: topology.kubernetes.io/zone
 operator: In
 values:
 - us-east1-b

to:

spec:
 nodeAffinity:
 required:
 nodeSelectorTerms:
 - matchExpressions:
 - key: topology.kubernetes.io/region
 operator: In
 values:
 - us-east1

As another example, providers sometimes offer new generations of disks. New disks cannot always be attached to older nodes in the cluster. This accessibility can also be expressed through PV node affinity and ensures the Pods can be scheduled to the right nodes. But when the disk is upgraded, new Pods using this disk can still be scheduled to older nodes. To prevent this, you may want to change the PV node affinity from:

spec:
 nodeAffinity:
 required:
 nodeSelectorTerms:
 - matchExpressions:
 - key: provider.com/disktype.gen1
 operator: In
 values:
 - available

to:

spec:
 nodeAffinity:
 required:
 nodeSelectorTerms:
 - matchExpressions:
 - key: provider.com/disktype.gen2
 operator: In
 values:
 - available

So, it is mutable now, a first step towards a more flexible online volume management. While it is a simple change that removes one validation from the API server, we still have a long way to go to integrate well with the Kubernetes ecosystem.

Try it out

This feature is for you if you are a Kubernetes cluster administrator, and your storage provider allows online update that you want to utilize, but those updates can affect the accessibility of the volume.

Note that changing PV node affinity alone will not actually change the accessibility of the underlying volume. Before using this feature, you must first update the underlying volume in the storage provider, and understand which nodes can access the volume after the update. You can then enable this feature and keep the PV node affinity in sync.

Currently, this feature is in alpha state. It is disabled by default, and may subject to change. To try it out, enable the MutablePVNodeAffinity feature gate on APIServer, then you can edit the PV spec.nodeAffinity field. Typically only administrators can edit PVs, please make sure you have the right RBAC permissions.

Race condition between updating and scheduling

There are only a few factors outside of a Pod that can affect the scheduling decision, and PV node affinity is one of them. It is fine to allow more nodes to access the volume by relaxing node affinity, but there is a race condition when you try to tighten node affinity: it is unclear how the Scheduler will see the modified PV in its cache, so there is a small window where the scheduler may place a Pod on an old node that can no longer access the volume. In this case, the Pod will stuck at ContainerCreating state.

One mitigation currently under discussion is for the kubelet to fail Pod startup if the PersistentVolume's node affinity is violated. This has not landed yet. So if you are trying this out now, please watch subsequent Pods that use the updated PV, and make sure they are scheduled onto nodes that can access the volume. If you update PV and immediately start new Pods in a script, it may not work as intended.

Future integration with CSI (Container Storage Interface)

Currently, it is up to the cluster administrator to modify both PV's node affinity and the underlying volume in the storage provider. But manual operations are error-prone and time-consuming. It is preferred to eventually integrate this with VolumeAttributesClass, so that an unprivileged user can modify their PersistentVolumeClaim (PVC) to trigger storage-side updates, and PV node affinity is updated automatically when appropriate, without the need for cluster admin's intervention.

We welcome your feedback from users and storage driver developers

As noted earlier, this is only a first step.

If you are a Kubernetes user, we would like to learn how you use (or will use) PV node affinity. Is it beneficial to update it online in your case?

If you are a CSI driver developer, would you be willing to implement this feature? How would you like the API to look?

Please provide your feedback via:

• Slack channel #sig-storage.
• Mailing list kubernetes-sig-storage.
• The KEP issue Mutable PersistentVolume Node Affinity.

For any inquiries or specific questions related to this feature, please reach out to the SIG Storage community.

08 Jan 2026 6:30pm GMT

If you maintain a CSI driver that uses service account tokens, Kubernetes v1.35 brings a refinement you'll want to know about. Since the introduction of the TokenRequests feature, service account tokens requested by CSI drivers have been passed to them through the volume_context field. While this has worked, it's not the ideal place for sensitive information, and we've seen instances where tokens were accidentally logged in CSI drivers.

Kubernetes v1.35 introduces a beta solution to address this: CSI Driver Opt-in for Service Account Tokens via Secrets Field. This allows CSI drivers to receive service account tokens through the secrets field in NodePublishVolumeRequest, which is the appropriate place for sensitive data in the CSI specification.

Understanding the existing approach

When CSI drivers use the TokenRequests feature, they can request service account tokens for workload identity by configuring the TokenRequests field in the CSIDriver spec. These tokens are passed to drivers as part of the volume attributes map, using the key csi.storage.k8s.io/serviceAccount.tokens.

The volume_context field works, but it's not designed for sensitive data. Because of this, there are a few challenges:

First, the protosanitizer tool that CSI drivers use doesn't treat volume context as sensitive, so service account tokens can end up in logs when gRPC requests are logged. This happened with CVE-2023-2878 in the Secrets Store CSI Driver and CVE-2024-3744 in the Azure File CSI Driver.

Second, each CSI driver that wants to avoid this issue needs to implement its own sanitization logic, which leads to inconsistency across drivers.

The CSI specification already has a secrets field in NodePublishVolumeRequest that's designed exactly for this kind of sensitive information. The challenge is that we can't just change where we put the tokens without breaking existing CSI drivers that expect them in volume context.

How the opt-in mechanism works

Kubernetes v1.35 introduces an opt-in mechanism that lets CSI drivers choose how they receive service account tokens. This way, existing drivers continue working as they do today, and drivers can move to the more appropriate secrets field when they're ready.

CSI drivers can set a new field in their CSIDriver spec:

#
# CAUTION: this is an example configuration.
# Do not use this for your own cluster!
#
apiVersion: storage.k8s.io/v1
kind: CSIDriver
metadata:
 name: example-csi-driver
spec:
 # ... existing fields ...
 tokenRequests:
 - audience: "example.com"
 expirationSeconds: 3600
 # New field for opting into secrets delivery
 serviceAccountTokenInSecrets: true # defaults to false

The behavior depends on the serviceAccountTokenInSecrets field:

When set to false (the default), tokens are placed in VolumeContext with the key csi.storage.k8s.io/serviceAccount.tokens, just like today. When set to true, tokens are placed only in the Secrets field with the same key.

About the beta release

The CSIServiceAccountTokenSecrets feature gate is enabled by default on both kubelet and kube-apiserver. Since the serviceAccountTokenInSecrets field defaults to false, enabling the feature gate doesn't change any existing behavior. All drivers continue receiving tokens via volume context unless they explicitly opt in. This is why we felt comfortable starting at beta rather than alpha.

Guide for CSI driver authors

If you maintain a CSI driver that uses service account tokens, here's how to adopt this feature.

Adding fallback logic

First, update your driver code to check both locations for tokens. This makes your driver compatible with both the old and new approaches:

const serviceAccountTokenKey = "csi.storage.k8s.io/serviceAccount.tokens"

func getServiceAccountTokens(req *csi.NodePublishVolumeRequest) (string, error) {
 // Check secrets field first (new behavior when driver opts in)
 if tokens, ok := req.Secrets[serviceAccountTokenKey]; ok {
 return tokens, nil
 }

 // Fall back to volume context (existing behavior)
 if tokens, ok := req.VolumeContext[serviceAccountTokenKey]; ok {
 return tokens, nil
 }

 return "", fmt.Errorf("service account tokens not found")
}

This fallback logic is backward compatible and safe to ship in any driver version, even before clusters upgrade to v1.35.

Rollout sequence

CSI driver authors need to follow a specific sequence when adopting this feature to avoid breaking existing volumes.

Driver preparation (can happen anytime)

You can start preparing your driver right away by adding fallback logic that checks both the secrets field and volume context for tokens. This code change is backward compatible and safe to ship in any driver version, even before clusters upgrade to v1.35. We encourage you to add this fallback logic early, cut releases, and even backport to maintenance branches where feasible.

Cluster upgrade and feature enablement

Once your driver has the fallback logic deployed, here's the safe rollout order for enabling the feature in a cluster:

1. Complete the kube-apiserver upgrade to 1.35 or later
2. Complete kubelet upgrade to 1.35 or later on all nodes
3. Ensure CSI driver version with fallback logic is deployed (if not already done in preparation phase)
4. Fully complete CSI driver DaemonSet rollout across all nodes
5. Update your CSIDriver manifest to set serviceAccountTokenInSecrets: true

Important constraints

The most important thing to remember is timing. If your CSI driver DaemonSet and CSIDriver object are in the same manifest or Helm chart, you need two separate updates. Deploy the new driver version with fallback logic first, wait for the DaemonSet rollout to complete, then update the CSIDriver spec to set serviceAccountTokenInSecrets: true.

Also, don't update the CSIDriver before all driver pods have rolled out. If you do, volume mounts will fail on nodes still running the old driver version, since those pods only check volume context.

Why this matters

Adopting this feature helps in a few ways:

• It eliminates the risk of accidentally logging service account tokens as part of volume context in gRPC requests
• It uses the CSI specification's designated field for sensitive data, which feels right
• The protosanitizer tool automatically handles the secrets field correctly, so you don't need driver-specific workarounds
• It's opt-in, so you can migrate at your own pace without breaking existing deployments

Call to action

We (Kubernetes SIG Storage) encourage CSI driver authors to adopt this feature and provide feedback on the migration experience. If you have thoughts on the API design or run into any issues during adoption, please reach out to us on the #csi channel on Kubernetes Slack (for an invitation, visit https://slack.k8s.io/).

You can follow along on KEP-5538 to track progress across the coming Kubernetes releases.

07 Jan 2026 6:30pm GMT

Many production Kubernetes clusters blend on-demand (higher-SLA) and spot/preemptible (lower-SLA) nodes to optimize costs while maintaining reliability for critical workloads. Platform teams need a safe default that keeps most workloads away from risky capacity, while allowing specific workloads to opt-in with explicit thresholds like "I can tolerate nodes with failure probability up to 5%".

Today, Kubernetes taints and tolerations can match exact values or check for existence, but they can't compare numeric thresholds. You'd need to create discrete taint categories, use external admission controllers, or accept less-than-optimal placement decisions.

In Kubernetes v1.35, we're introducing Extended Toleration Operators as an alpha feature. This enhancement adds Gt (Greater Than) and Lt (Less Than) operators to spec.tolerations, enabling threshold-based scheduling decisions that unlock new possibilities for SLA-based placement, cost optimization, and performance-aware workload distribution.

The evolution of tolerations

Historically, Kubernetes supported two primary toleration operators:

• Equal: The toleration matches a taint if the key and value are exactly equal
• Exists: The toleration matches a taint if the key exists, regardless of value

While these worked well for categorical scenarios, they fell short for numeric comparisons. Starting with v1.35, we are closing this gap.

Consider these real-world scenarios:

• SLA requirements: Schedule high-availability workloads only on nodes with failure probability below a certain threshold
• Cost optimization: Allow cost-sensitive batch jobs to run on cheaper nodes that exceed a specific cost-per-hour value
• Performance guarantees: Ensure latency-sensitive applications run only on nodes with disk IOPS or network bandwidth above minimum thresholds

Without numeric comparison operators, cluster operators have had to resort to workarounds like creating multiple discrete taint values or using external admission controllers, neither of which scale well or provide the flexibility needed for dynamic threshold-based scheduling.

Why extend tolerations instead of using NodeAffinity?

You might wonder: NodeAffinity already supports numeric comparison operators, so why extend tolerations? While NodeAffinity is powerful for expressing pod preferences, taints and tolerations provide critical operational benefits:

• Policy orientation: NodeAffinity is per-pod, requiring every workload to explicitly opt-out of risky nodes. Taints invert control-nodes declare their risk level, and only pods with matching tolerations may land there. This provides a safer default; most pods stay away from spot/preemptible nodes unless they explicitly opt-in.
• Eviction semantics: NodeAffinity has no eviction capability. Taints support the NoExecute effect with tolerationSeconds, enabling operators to drain and evict pods when a node's SLA degrades or spot instances receive termination notices.
• Operational ergonomics: Centralized, node-side policy is consistent with other safety taints like disk-pressure and memory-pressure, making cluster management more intuitive.

This enhancement preserves the well-understood safety model of taints and tolerations while enabling threshold-based placement for SLA-aware scheduling.

Introducing Gt and Lt operators

Kubernetes v1.35 introduces two new operators for tolerations:

• Gt (Greater Than): The toleration matches if the taint's numeric value is less than the toleration's value
• Lt (Less Than): The toleration matches if the taint's numeric value is greater than the toleration's value

When a pod tolerates a taint with Lt, it's saying "I can tolerate nodes where this metric is less than my threshold". Since tolerations allow scheduling, the pod can run on nodes where the taint value is greater than the toleration value. Think of it as: "I tolerate nodes that are above my minimum requirements".

These operators work with numeric taint values and enable the scheduler to make sophisticated placement decisions based on continuous metrics rather than discrete categories.

Use cases and examples

Let's explore how Extended Toleration Operators solve real-world scheduling challenges.

Example 1: Spot instance protection with SLA thresholds

Many clusters mix on-demand and spot/preemptible nodes to optimize costs. Spot nodes offer significant savings but have higher failure rates. You want most workloads to avoid spot nodes by default, while allowing specific workloads to opt-in with clear SLA boundaries.

First, taint spot nodes with their failure probability (for example, 15% annual failure rate):

apiVersion: v1
kind: Node
metadata:
 name: spot-node-1
spec:
 taints:
 - key: "failure-probability"
 value: "15"
 effect: "NoExecute"

On-demand nodes have much lower failure rates:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Node
metadata:
 name: ondemand-node-1
spec:
 taints:
 - key: "failure-probability"
 value: "2"
 effect: "NoExecute"

Critical workloads can specify strict SLA requirements:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
 name: payment-processor
spec:
 tolerations:
 - key: "failure-probability"
 operator: "Lt"
 value: "5"
 effect: "NoExecute"
 tolerationSeconds: 30
 containers:
 - name: app
 image: payment-app:v1

This pod will only schedule on nodes with failure-probability less than 5 (meaning ondemand-node-1 with 2% but not spot-node-1 with 15%). The NoExecute effect with tolerationSeconds: 30 means if a node's SLA degrades (for example, cloud provider changes the taint value), the pod gets 30 seconds to gracefully terminate before forced eviction.

Meanwhile, a fault-tolerant batch job can explicitly opt-in to spot instances:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
 name: batch-job
spec:
 tolerations:
 - key: "failure-probability"
 operator: "Lt"
 value: "20"
 effect: "NoExecute"
 containers:
 - name: worker
 image: batch-worker:v1

This batch job tolerates nodes with failure probability up to 20%, so it can run on both on-demand and spot nodes, maximizing cost savings while accepting higher risk.

Example 2: AI workload placement with GPU tiers

AI and machine learning workloads often have specific hardware requirements. With Extended Toleration Operators, you can create GPU node tiers and ensure workloads land on appropriately powered hardware.

Taint GPU nodes with their compute capability score:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Node
metadata:
 name: gpu-node-a100
spec:
 taints:
 - key: "gpu-compute-score"
 value: "1000"
 effect: "NoSchedule"
---
apiVersion: v1
kind: Node
metadata:
 name: gpu-node-t4
spec:
 taints:
 - key: "gpu-compute-score"
 value: "500"
 effect: "NoSchedule"

A heavy training workload can require high-performance GPUs:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
 name: model-training
spec:
 tolerations:
 - key: "gpu-compute-score"
 operator: "Gt"
 value: "800"
 effect: "NoSchedule"
 containers:
 - name: trainer
 image: ml-trainer:v1
 resources:
 limits:
 nvidia.com/gpu: 1

This ensures the training pod only schedules on nodes with compute scores greater than 800 (like the A100 node), preventing placement on lower-tier GPUs that would slow down training.

Meanwhile, inference workloads with less demanding requirements can use any available GPU:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
 name: model-inference
spec:
 tolerations:
 - key: "gpu-compute-score"
 operator: "Gt"
 value: "400"
 effect: "NoSchedule"
 containers:
 - name: inference
 image: ml-inference:v1
 resources:
 limits:
 nvidia.com/gpu: 1

Example 3: Cost-optimized workload placement

For batch processing or non-critical workloads, you might want to minimize costs by running on cheaper nodes, even if they have lower performance characteristics.

Nodes can be tainted with their cost rating:

spec:
 taints:
 - key: "cost-per-hour"
 value: "50"
 effect: "NoSchedule"

A cost-sensitive batch job can express its tolerance for expensive nodes:

tolerations:
- key: "cost-per-hour"
 operator: "Lt"
 value: "100"
 effect: "NoSchedule"

This batch job will schedule on nodes costing less than $100/hour but avoid more expensive nodes. Combined with Kubernetes scheduling priorities, this enables sophisticated cost-tiering strategies where critical workloads get premium nodes while batch workloads efficiently use budget-friendly resources.

Example 4: Performance-based placement

Storage-intensive applications often require minimum disk performance guarantees. With Extended Toleration Operators, you can enforce these requirements at the scheduling level.

tolerations:
- key: "disk-iops"
 operator: "Gt"
 value: "3000"
 effect: "NoSchedule"

This toleration ensures the pod only schedules on nodes where disk-iops exceeds 3000. The Gt operator means "I need nodes that are greater than this minimum".

How to use this feature

Extended Toleration Operators is an alpha feature in Kubernetes v1.35. To try it out:

1. Enable the feature gate on both your API server and scheduler:

   --feature-gates=TaintTolerationComparisonOperators=true
   

2. Taint your nodes with numeric values representing the metrics relevant to your scheduling needs:

    kubectl taint nodes node-1 failure-probability=5:NoSchedule
    kubectl taint nodes node-2 disk-iops=5000:NoSchedule
   

3. Use the new operators in your pod specifications:

    spec:
    tolerations:
    - key: "failure-probability"
    operator: "Lt"
    value: "1"
    effect: "NoSchedule"
   

What's next?

This alpha release is just the beginning. As we gather feedback from the community, we plan to:

• Add support for CEL (Common Expression Language) expressions in tolerations and node affinity for even more flexible scheduling logic, including semantic versioning comparisons
• Improve integration with cluster autoscaling for threshold-aware capacity planning
• Graduate the feature to beta and eventually GA with production-ready stability

We're particularly interested in hearing about your use cases! Do you have scenarios where threshold-based scheduling would solve problems? Are there additional operators or capabilities you'd like to see?

Getting involved

This feature is driven by the SIG Scheduling community. Please join us to connect with the community and share your ideas and feedback around this feature and beyond.

You can reach the maintainers of this feature at:

• Slack: #sig-scheduling on Kubernetes Slack
• Mailing list: kubernetes-sig-scheduling@googlegroups.com

For questions or specific inquiries related to Extended Toleration Operators, please reach out to the SIG Scheduling community. We look forward to hearing from you!

How can I learn more?

• Taints and Tolerations for understanding the fundamentals
• Numeric comparison operators for details on using Gt and Lt operators
• KEP-5471: Extended Toleration Operators for Threshold-Based Placement

05 Jan 2026 6:30pm GMT