* iterators that don't support remove, passing one to the FilteredEntryMultimap constructor would
   * lead to a multimap whose removal operations would fail. This method combines the predicates to
   * avoid that problem.
   */
  private static <K extends @Nullable Object, V extends @Nullable Object>
      Multimap<K, V> filterFiltered(
          FilteredMultimap<K, V> multimap, Predicate<? super Entry<K, V>> entryPredicate) {

   * iterators that don't support remove, passing one to the FilteredEntryMultimap constructor would
   * lead to a multimap whose removal operations would fail. This method combines the predicates to
   * avoid that problem.
   */
  private static <K extends @Nullable Object, V extends @Nullable Object>
      Multimap<K, V> filterFiltered(
          FilteredMultimap<K, V> multimap, Predicate<? super Entry<K, V>> entryPredicate) {

  /**
   * Signals some other thread waiting on a satisfied guard, if one exists.
   *
   * <p>We manage calls to this method carefully, to signal only when necessary, but never losing a
   * signal, which is the classic problem of this kind of concurrency construct. We must signal if
   * the current thread is about to relinquish the lock and may have changed the state protected by
   * the monitor, thereby causing some guard to be satisfied.
   *

                || this.sbuf[7] != (byte) 'B') {
            throw new IOException("Houston we have a synchronization problem");
        }

        int nextCommand = Encdec.dec_uint32le(this.sbuf, 4 + 20);
        final int maximumBufferSize = getContext().getConfig().getMaximumBufferSize();

# Some targets have the same py source file, but use different
# configurations via `requires-` tags. This results in an action
# conflict when precompiling. Disable to avoid that problem.
# See https://github.com/bazel-contrib/rules_python/issues/2445
common --@rules_python//python/config_settings:precompile=force_disabled

    - **Known issues**

        - Kernel crash with Aufs storage driver on Debian Jessie
          ([#27885](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/27885)).
          The issue can be identified by using the node problem detector.

        - File descriptor leak on init/control.
          ([#275](https://github.com/containerd/containerd/issues/275))

        - Additional memory overhead per container.

  // See: http://cs.oswego.edu/pipermail/concurrency-interest/2015-January/013800.html
  // For a (long) discussion about this specific issue and the general futility of life.
  //
  // For the time being we are OK with the problem discussed above since it requires a caller to
  // introduce a very specific kind of data-race. And given the other operations performed by these

  
  In particular, octets within IPv4 addresses are not allowed to have any leading
  `0`s, and IPv4-mapped IPv6 values (e.g. `::ffff:192.168.0.1`) are forbidden.
  These sorts of values can potentially cause security problems when different
  components interpret the same string as referring to different IP addresses
  (as in CVE-2021-29923).
  
  This tightening applies only to fields in built-in API kinds, and not to

*   Problems deleting local static pods have been resolved. ([#48339](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/48339),[ @dixudx](https://github.com/dixudx))

- Multiple Kubernetes clusters can now share the same resource group
    - When upgrading from previous releases, issues will arise with public IPs if multiple clusters share the same resource group. To solve these problems, make the following changes to the cluster:
Recreate the relevant LoadBalancer services, or add a new tag 'kubernetes-cluster-name: <cluster-name>' manually for existing public IPs.