Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Fix comments at fit_test.go to increase redability #116066

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 7, 2023
Merged

Fix comments at fit_test.go to increase redability #116066

merged 1 commit into from Mar 7, 2023

Conversation

yoongon
Copy link
Contributor

@yoongon yoongon commented Feb 26, 2023

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:

  • Fix incorrect comments (One tc is not related with init container, so fix the comment)
  • Deleted unrelated test cases (One tc is not related with storage, so delete it from storage test code)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 26, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Feb 26, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @yoongon. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Feb 26, 2023
kerthcet
kerthcet reviewed Feb 27, 2023
View reviewed changes
pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/noderesources/fit_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/noderesources/fit_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/noderesources/fit_test.go Outdated
wantStatus: framework.NewStatus(framework.Unschedulable, "Too many pods"),
},
{
pod: newResourceInitPod(newResourcePod(framework.Resource{MilliCPU: 5, Memory: 1}), framework.Resource{MilliCPU: 5, Memory: 1}),
nodeInfo: framework.NewNodeInfo(newResourcePod(framework.Resource{MilliCPU: 5, Memory: 19})),
name: "even for equal edge case predicate fails when there's no space for additional pod due to init container",
name: "even for equal edge case for init containers, predicate fails when there's no space for additional pod",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
name: "even for equal edge case for init containers, predicate fails when there's no space for additional pod",
name: "even for equal edge case, predicate fails when there's no space for additional pod due to init container",

This is actually more clear to me.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@yoongon yoongon Feb 27, 2023 •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for your feedback :)

https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/noderesources/fit_test.go#L561
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/pkg/scheduler/framework/plugins/noderesources/fit.go#L257

It seems to fail because the number of pod({MilliCPU: 5, Memory: 19}) inside node + 1 is greater than AllowedPodNumber(1). 1 +1 > 1
I think init container is not related with this one, so I changed the line.
Correct me if I am wrong.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We construct the pod with newResourceInitPod here, so we want to highlight the init container, then it matters. Anyway, I think it doesn't make a lot of sense to polish this comments.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for your nice explanation. I will leave as it is.

@kerthcet
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Feb 27, 2023
@yoongon yoongon requested review from kerthcet and removed request for denkensk March 3, 2023 01:01
@yoongon
Copy link
Contributor Author

yoongon commented Mar 4, 2023

@kerthcet I updated the commit based on your review. Please check.
Thanks

@kerthcet
Copy link
Member

kerthcet commented Mar 5, 2023

/lgtm
/assign @alculquicondor

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 5, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: d97c67778ad9bd3122df921af126bbd3a435b42d

alculquicondor
alculquicondor reviewed Mar 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alculquicondor alculquicondor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, yoongon

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 6, 2023
@pacoxu
Copy link
Member

pacoxu commented Mar 7, 2023

/release-note-none

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Mar 7, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 9d7db70 into kubernetes:master Mar 7, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.27 milestone Mar 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@alculquicondor alculquicondor alculquicondor left review comments

@kerthcet kerthcet Awaiting requested review from kerthcet

Assignees

@alculquicondor alculquicondor

@kerthcet kerthcet

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.27
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@yoongon @k8s-ci-robot @kerthcet @pacoxu @alculquicondor