-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 414
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Bump e2e test k8s versions #4865
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4865 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 62.04% 62.03% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 201 201
Lines 16878 16878
==========================================
- Hits 10472 10470 -2
- Misses 5623 5625 +2
Partials 783 783 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
18e17fb
to
278e497
Compare
@mboersma In case you haven't tracked it down yet, I think the test is failing because the KubeadmControlPlane resource specifies |
278e497
to
f0b37c7
Compare
Kubebuilder is migrating their domain and causing the link checker to fail in the meantime: |
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e-optional |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for also updating docs!
/lgtm
/approve
/hold for optional tests
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 55d52c386b98997a2216f93f6313b09494c9c8fa
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: nojnhuh The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Newer Flatcar image was located, so something else must have gone wrong:
I think I'll just revert the Flatcar bump for now. |
f0b37c7
to
e0af1ae
Compare
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e-optional /lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: b67e9b974ee4e42f3bb00ebf4e1be9c63ae96a49
|
After reverting Flatcar to a known working version of Kubernetes (1.26 😞), the Workload ID optional test is still failing. Not sure why bumping the k8s version would affect this, but the kubelet log shows things aren't happy. |
Looks like yet another newly-GA feature gate: cluster-api-provider-azure/templates/test/ci/cluster-template-prow-workload-identity.yaml Line 60 in e0af1ae
https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates-removed/ |
You rock @nojnhuh, I was just starting to dig deeper but that looks like the culprit. For my edification, where did you find this in the logs? Was I just not looking closely enough? |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 5865fc54a9923f2c601b3e19f17b408328fd107e
|
43e702e
to
e9044ee
Compare
/lgtm Reminder there's still a hold on this for the optional tests which have passed before, so feel free to remove that whenever. I'm not too worried about the rebase affecting the optional tests. |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: c9e70f49ecf0486c567add819eef343def5e0a3c
|
I'll run the -optional tests again before we merge it. Currently I'm more concerned with the -ci-artifacts failures that seem not to be flakes... |
e9044ee
to
8004878
Compare
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e-optional |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
I expect the MEC/edge zone test in the optional job to still fail, but I don't think we should block this PR on that.
@mboersma Feel free to drop the hold when the optional job finishes and the commit history here looks however you want.
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: c6ed8bb4d25069beec5bfd9beeb2277f8459a624
|
I thought I'd leave this as three separate commits, because I can imagine someone spelunking the codebase and wondering "When did CAPZ lose the |
@mboersma: The following test failed, say
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. 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. |
/cherry-pick release-1.15 As expected, the MEC e2e test failed, but everything else is green. |
@mboersma: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.15 in a new PR and assign it to you. In 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. |
@mboersma: #4865 failed to apply on top of branch "release-1.15":
In 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. |
@mboersma: #4865 failed to apply on top of branch "release-1.14":
In 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. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
Updates Kubernetes versions under test to newer versions.
I bumped Flatcar too, hopefully that works!Nope, reverted.Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
See #4434 for the previous time these were bumped.
Special notes for your reviewer:
TODOs:
Release note: