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

tests: Checks for Windows permissions as well #71036

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 29, 2018
Merged

tests: Checks for Windows permissions as well #71036

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 29, 2018

Conversation

claudiubelu
Copy link
Contributor

@claudiubelu claudiubelu commented Nov 14, 2018 •
edited

What type of PR is this?

Uncomment only one, leave it on its own line:

/kind failing-test

What this PR does / why we need it:

Some mounttest related tests are checking the file permissions set on the
container files, but the default file permissions on Windows is 775 instead of
644, causing some tests to fail.

Keep in mind that file permissions work differently on Windows, and setting file
permissions via Kubernetes is not currently supported on Windows.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Related issue: #70879

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/failing-test Categorizes issue or PR as related to a consistently or frequently failing test. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 14, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @BCLAU. 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-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 14, 2018
@adelina-t adelina-t mentioned this pull request Nov 15, 2018
Closed
@claudiubelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @madhusudancs

@yujuhong
Copy link
Contributor

/cc @kubernetes/sig-storage-misc to review the changes

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@yujuhong: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: review, the, changes, to.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

/cc @kubernetes/sig-storage-misc to review the changes

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 sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. label Nov 16, 2018
@jsafrane
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 Nov 16, 2018
jsafrane
jsafrane reviewed Nov 16, 2018
View reviewed changes
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jsafrane
Copy link
Member

jsafrane commented Nov 16, 2018 •
edited

++ check hack/verify-gofmt.sh output, it's not happy about your coding style :-)

@claudiubelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

@jsafrane
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 16, 2018
@claudiubelu
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

@claudiubelu
tests: Checks for Windows permissions as well
0df9c0a 
Some mounttest related tests are checking the file permissions set on the
container files, but the default file permissions on Windows is 775 instead of
644, causing some tests to fail.

Keep in mind that file permissions work differently on Windows, and setting file
permissions via Kubernetes is not currently supported on Windows.
ixdy
ixdy reviewed Nov 26, 2018
View reviewed changes
test/e2e/common/configmap_volume.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 27, 2018
ixdy
ixdy reviewed Nov 28, 2018
View reviewed changes
test/e2e/framework/util.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/e2e/common/configmap_volume.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@ixdy
Copy link
Member

ixdy commented Nov 28, 2018

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 28, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bclau, ixdy, jsafrane

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 Nov 28, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 409a5ec into kubernetes:master Nov 29, 2018
adelina-t added a commit to e2e-win/e2e-win-prow-deployment that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2018
@adelina-t
Update exclusion list
492ced3 
kubernetes/kubernetes#71256 merged thus there is no need to exclude the following tests:

[sig-apps] ReplicaSet should adopt matching pods on creation and release no longer matching pods [Conformance]
[sig-apps] ReplicationController should adopt matching pods on creation [Conformance]

kubernetes/kubernetes#71036 merged thus there is no need to exclude the following tests:

[sig-storage] Secrets  should be consumable from pods in volume [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Secrets  should be consumable from pods in volume with mappings [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Secrets  should be consumable in multiple volumes in a pod [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected secret  should be consumable from pods in volume [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected secret  should be consumable from pods in volume with mappings [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected secret  should be consumable in multiple volumes in a pod [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected configMap  should be consumable from pods in volume [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected configMap  should be consumable from pods in volume with mappings [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] ConfigMap  should be consumable from pods in volume [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] ConfigMap  should be consumable from pods in volume with mappings [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Secrets  should be able to mount in a volume regardless of a different secret existing with same name in different namespace [NodeConformance] [Conformance]
[sig-storage] Projected secret  should be able to mount in a volume regardless of a different secret existing with same name in different namespace [NodeConformance]
@adelina-t adelina-t mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2018
Merged
@claudiubelu claudiubelu mentioned this pull request Dec 7, 2018
Merged
@claudiubelu claudiubelu mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2019
Closed
6 tasks
@claudiubelu claudiubelu deleted the test-windows-permissions branch April 19, 2019 13:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jsafrane jsafrane jsafrane left review comments

@ixdy ixdy ixdy left review comments

@ncdc ncdc Awaiting requested review from ncdc

Assignees

@madhusudancs madhusudancs

@jsafrane jsafrane

@ixdy ixdy

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/failing-test Categorizes issue or PR as related to a consistently or frequently failing test. 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. 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/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@claudiubelu @k8s-ci-robot @yujuhong @jsafrane @ixdy @madhusudancs