OKD-259: Test OKD Feature set Against OKD and OCP clusters#30693
OKD-259: Test OKD Feature set Against OKD and OCP clusters#30693openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 3 commits intoopenshift:mainfrom
Conversation
|
@jatinsu: This pull request references OKD-259 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the epic to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set. DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
Pipeline controller notification For optional jobs, comment This repository is configured in: automatic mode |
20c9964 to
45e89b6
Compare
|
Scheduling required tests: Scheduling tests matching the |
|
/retest |
|
Risk analysis has seen new tests most likely introduced by this PR. New Test Risks for sha: 4459b59
New tests seen in this PR at sha: 4459b59
|
|
Scheduling required tests: Scheduling tests matching the |
|
Risk analysis has seen new tests most likely introduced by this PR. New Test Risks for sha: 4a68aba
New tests seen in this PR at sha: 4a68aba
|
|
/payload-job-with-prs periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.22-e2e-gcp-ovn openshift/kubernetes#2420 |
|
@benluddy: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/8a7a0460-f6f8-11f0-9c02-c6f07dd2780f-0 |
4a68aba to
7e106ba
Compare
…clusters Test now checks for OKD clusters that already have featureset enabled Simplfied test to only test ocp clusters
7e106ba to
c634816
Compare
|
Scheduling required tests: Scheduling tests matching the |
bertinatto
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be possible to schedule a OKD job to make sure this test is skipped there?
|
|
||
| if cv.Status.ObservedGeneration > initialGeneration { | ||
| if cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate == nil || desired != *cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate { | ||
| if cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate == nil || !reflect.DeepEqual(desired, *cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was clearly wrong, good catch. However, this change is unrelated to this commit, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change is unrelated to this commit
By commit do you mean this PR in general or the commit Fixed monitor and imagepolicy.go errors from vendoring? The reason for these changes is for some reason after vendoring the API repo both monitor.go and imagepolicy.go would throw errors. I decided to keep it in a separate commit rather than putting it in the Vendor API commit as I'm manually editing code, but I can squash it into the Vendored API repo commit if you'd like.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I meant the commit Fixed monitor and imagepolicy.go errors from vendoring. Thanks for clarifying. I thought this change wasn't related to the commit.
| Spec: configv1.ClusterImagePolicySpec{ | ||
| Scopes: []configv1.ImageScope{testSignedPolicyScope}, | ||
| Policy: configv1.Policy{ | ||
| Policy: configv1.ImageSigstoreVerificationPolicy{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sanchezl since you authored openshift/api#2626, could you take a look at these changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For some context, unit tests would fail without this change as I vendored the API repo
|
|
||
| if cv.Status.ObservedGeneration > initialGeneration { | ||
| if cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate == nil || desired != *cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate { | ||
| if cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate == nil || !reflect.DeepEqual(desired, *cv.Spec.DesiredUpdate) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I meant the commit Fixed monitor and imagepolicy.go errors from vendoring. Thanks for clarifying. I thought this change wasn't related to the commit.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bertinatto, jatinsu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/hold |
We test upgrades regularly as part of our nightly releases so a test for this seems kind of redundant for OKD. The featureset will be enabled by default on OKD clusters, and as Ben said it would be hard to miss if the OKD featureset is blocked on OKD. |
|
/hold cancel |
|
/retest |
|
/verified by @jatinsu |
|
/verified bypass |
|
@Prashanth684: The DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 |
1 similar comment
|
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 |
|
/retest-required |
|
/override ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 |
|
@Prashanth684: Overrode contexts on behalf of Prashanth684: ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@jatinsu: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
Job Failure Risk Analysis for sha: c634816
Risk analysis has seen new tests most likely introduced by this PR. New Test Risks for sha: c634816
New tests seen in this PR at sha: c634816
|
9b50a28
into
openshift:main
|
We've not accounted for an edge case here on techpreview clusters: I reckon we probably want to also skip this test on All of our tech preview jobs on cluster-capi-operator are now failing, can you PTAL @jatinsu cc @Prashanth684 @bertinatto as reviewers edit: just seen #30757 |
This test checks for OKD and OCP clusters and attempts to enable the OKD featureset against them. If it's a OKD cluster, it should be able to enabled, but if it's a OCP cluster it should reject.
Kubenertes PR for context: openshift/kubernetes#2420