-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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
Update kubevirtci to latest and KubeVirt to 1.0, fix all the tests #187
Conversation
568781a
to
abb2a23
Compare
cc @alromeros |
Signed-off-by: Michael Henriksen <mhenriks@redhat.com>
abb2a23
to
da03430
Compare
|
||
By("Creating backup test-backup") | ||
err = framework.CreateBackupForNamespace(timeout, backupName, f.Namespace.Name, snapshotLocation, f.BackupNamespace, true) | ||
Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred()) | ||
|
||
phase, err := framework.GetBackupPhase(timeout, backupName, f.BackupNamespace) | ||
Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred()) | ||
Expect(phase).To(Equal(velerov1api.BackupPhaseCompleted)) | ||
Expect(phase).To(Equal(velerov1api.BackupPhasePartiallyFailed)) |
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.
This change is related to populators. This test does a backup while clone in progress. Velero does not like that the PVC is Pending
. I don't think there is anything we can do on our end to prevent this.
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.
Looks good! Adding a couple of questions so this looks like a proper review
/lgtm
users: | ||
- "fedora" | ||
qemuGuestAgent: {} | ||
# users: |
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.
Is this a typo or intended? (I mean the commented user)
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.
left that there to indicate the actual user used but I'm not sure anyone is looking at these yamls
@@ -60,6 +66,20 @@ func PodWithPvcSpec(podName, pvcName string, cmd, args []string) *v1.Pod { | |||
MountPath: "/pvc", | |||
}, | |||
}, | |||
SecurityContext: &v1.SecurityContext{ |
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.
Just nitpick but most of the time I see people using the pointer library, IMO looks cleaner than having vars for each boolean. No need to change anything though.
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.
Yeah I don't disagree
Signed-off-by: Michael Henriksen <mhenriks@redhat.com>
da03430
to
43442e1
Compare
/lgtm |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mhenriks 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 |
What this PR does / why we need it:
Update test environment and make sure all tests pass. Biggest issues around GC now being disabled by default.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: