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.

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

Increase the AppArmor pod stop timeout to match the start timeout #31314

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 24, 2016

Conversation

timstclair
Copy link

@timstclair timstclair commented Aug 24, 2016

Fixes #30750


This change is Reviewable

@timstclair timstclair added priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Aug 24, 2016
@timstclair timstclair added this to the v1.4 milestone Aug 24, 2016
@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 24, 2016
@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

LGTM

@dchen1107 dchen1107 added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 24, 2016
@@ -146,7 +146,9 @@ func loadTestProfiles() error {

func runAppArmorTest(f *framework.Framework, profile string) api.PodStatus {
pod := createPodWithAppArmor(f, profile)
framework.ExpectNoError(f.WaitForPodNoLongerRunning(pod.Name))
// The pod needs to start before it stops, so wait for the longer start timeout.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just for my own education, all apparmor tests expect the pod to fail in certain way?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not necessarily fail. The pod container just runs touch and exits, and then the apparmor tests look at the container exit code to determine whether it succeeded (which should be conditional on whether the profile was applied correctly)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see. So the test expects the pod to terminate soon. Thanks for answering!

@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented Aug 24, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit a29ad35.

@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit 355178b into kubernetes:master Aug 24, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants