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

tests: Separates DNS hosts entries test #72729

Merged

Conversation

@claudiubelu
Copy link
Contributor

claudiubelu commented Jan 9, 2019

At the moment, Windows cannot mount individual files into Containers, which means
that the Kubelet-managed hosts file cannot be mounted into the Container, causing
the "should provide DNS for the cluster" test to fail.

This test separates the hosts entries checks from the mentioned test to a new test.

What type of PR is this?

/kind failing-test
/kind feature

/sig testing
/sig windows

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

At the moment, mounting individual files in Docker Containers on Windows is not possible, and because of this, Kubelet cannot mount and manage the Containers' hosts files.

Because of this, the test should provide DNS for the cluster will fail when using Windows Containers because the hosts entries cannot be validated.

This patch splits the /etc/hosts file entries validation into a separate test, which is a necessary step in order to have the mentioned test pass on Windows.

Related issue: #70189

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

The new test ``[sig-network] DNS should provide /etc/hosts entries for the cluster [LinuxOnly] [Conformance]`` will validate the host entries set in the ``/etc/hosts`` file (pod's FQDN and hostname), which should be managed by Kubelet.

The test has the tag ``[LinuxOnly]`` because individual files cannot be mounted in Windows Containers, which means that it cannot pass using Windows nodes. 
@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 9, 2019

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.

@claudiubelu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

claudiubelu commented Jan 10, 2019

@danwinship

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

danwinship commented Jan 10, 2019

/ok-test-test
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm label Jan 10, 2019
@danwinship

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

danwinship commented Jan 10, 2019

/ok-to-test

@claudiubelu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

claudiubelu commented Jan 10, 2019

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

@PatrickLang PatrickLang added this to In Review in SIG-Windows Jan 11, 2019
@spiffxp spiffxp added this to To Triage in cncf-k8s-conformance-wg Jan 11, 2019
@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Jan 16, 2019

/sig network

@dims

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

dims commented Jan 16, 2019

@kubernetes/sig-network-pr-reviews @thockin @dcbw @caseydavenport Can the sig-network please sign off on this conformance related change?

@PatrickLang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

PatrickLang commented Jan 23, 2019

/milestone v1.14

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.14 milestone Jan 23, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm label Feb 19, 2019
@claudiubelu claudiubelu mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2019
6 of 6 tasks complete
@bowei

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bowei commented Feb 21, 2019

/approve
/lgtm

@bowei

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bowei commented Feb 21, 2019

Looks like someone from conformance needs to do the final approval.

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

Changes to the set of conformance tests should have release notes. Please add one that briefly explains what this change is to someone who cares about what conformance tests are run, passing/failing, etc., such as a Kubernetes provider or someone building their own cluster "the hard way".

That should be added to our release-note guidance:
kubernetes/community#484

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

@bowei The GCE/GKE-specific tests of google.com and metadata shouldn't be in the conformance test. Please move it to a non-conformance e2e test.

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 22, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bclau, bgrant0607, bowei

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

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

FYI, I filed an issue proposing that any conformance test that checks the provider should die and fail: #74432

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

/hold

@bgrant0607

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bgrant0607 commented Feb 22, 2019

The hold can be removed once a release note is written

@claudiubelu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

claudiubelu commented Feb 22, 2019

I've added a Release Note, but I'm not particularly sure about its formatting, if I should break the lines or not.

@bowei

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

bowei commented Feb 22, 2019

@prameshj can you take a look at moving the GCE-specific tests out of the conformance?

@marpaia

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

marpaia commented Feb 22, 2019

In the PR description, the release note should go in the stanza under "Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?" where it currently says "NONE".

@claudiubelu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

claudiubelu commented Feb 22, 2019

Strange. For some reason, it didn't save my edit. Luckily, the message was still there when I tried to edit it again.

@adelina-t

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

adelina-t commented Feb 26, 2019

/lgtm
/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit a99d6ce into kubernetes:master Feb 26, 2019
17 checks passed
17 checks passed
cla/linuxfoundation bclau authorized
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-build Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-test Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-cross Skipped
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-device-plugin-gpu Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-godeps Skipped
pull-kubernetes-integration Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-local-e2e Skipped
pull-kubernetes-local-e2e-containerized Context retired without replacement.
Details
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-typecheck Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-verify Job succeeded.
Details
pull-publishing-bot-validate Skipped
tide In merge pool.
Details
SIG-Windows automation moved this from In Review to Done (v.1.14) Feb 26, 2019
cncf-k8s-conformance-wg automation moved this from To Triage to Done Feb 26, 2019
@lee0c lee0c mentioned this pull request Mar 5, 2019
@claudiubelu claudiubelu deleted the claudiubelu:tests/split-dns-host-entries branch Apr 19, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.