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: Wait for SSP operator to be ready after TLS policy tests #513

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2023
Merged

fix: Wait for SSP operator to be ready after TLS policy tests #513

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2023

Conversation

akrejcir
Copy link
Collaborator

@akrejcir akrejcir commented Mar 7, 2023 •
edited
Loading

What this PR does / why we need it:
The TLS policy tests cause the operator to enter crash loop. This commit adds code that waits until it is ready.

Release note:

None

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. labels Mar 7, 2023
@akrejcir akrejcir changed the title fix: Wait for SSP operator to be ready after crypto policy tests fix: Wait for SSP operator to be ready after TLS policy tests Mar 7, 2023
@akrejcir
Copy link
Collaborator Author

akrejcir commented Mar 7, 2023

/cc @0xFelix

@akrejcir akrejcir force-pushed the fix-crypt-tests branch 2 times, most recently from 2403ffe to af47410 Compare March 8, 2023 10:38
@akrejcir
fix: Wait for SSP operator to be ready after TLS policy tests
ba7059c 
The TLS policy tests cause the operator to enter crash loop.
This commit adds code that waits until it is ready.

Signed-off-by: Andrej Krejcir <akrejcir@redhat.com>
@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Mar 8, 2023

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

lyarwood
lyarwood approved these changes Mar 8, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@lyarwood lyarwood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

supernit about the comment but there's enough context so feel free to ignore.

tests/crypto_policy_test.go
@@ -103,6 +106,19 @@ var _ = Describe("Crypto Policy", func() {

AfterEach(func() {
strategy.RevertToOriginalSspCr()

// Because of bug[1], the SSP operator will move to CrashLoopBackOff state,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

supernit - I forget what the rules are for FIXMEs in this codebase but this strikes me as something we could mark as FIXME once that bug is resolved?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are no rules. Do you have a suggestion for what is a good way to mark as FIXME? Or simply prefix the comment with FIXME: ?

Copy link
Member

@lyarwood lyarwood Mar 9, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think sonarcloud complained when I tried this in past but if that's acceptable then something as simple as

// FIXME - Because of a known bug [1], the SSP operator will move to CrashLoopBackOff state,
// so we need to wait until it is running. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2151248

would be great so it's discover-able in the future.

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 8, 2023
@dominikholler
Copy link
Contributor

@akrejcir Please do not mention the bug in the commit message or in the PR description, because this would make the automation assume that this PR/commit would contain already the fix the the bug.

@akrejcir
Copy link
Collaborator Author

akrejcir commented Mar 9, 2023

@akrejcir Please do not mention the bug in the commit message or in the PR description, because this would make the automation assume that this PR/commit would contain already the fix the the bug.

Good to know. Removed the link.

@akrejcir
Copy link
Collaborator Author

akrejcir commented Mar 9, 2023

/retest

@0xFelix
Copy link
Member

0xFelix commented Mar 10, 2023 •
edited
Loading

I think we have to reconsider how the automation works. If we exactly know the issue (speaking of a known bug), we should be able to add a direct reference to it. Does the automation really pick up links in the code too? Or just in the description of a commit?

Edit: Can't read properly, disregard this message.

0xFelix
0xFelix approved these changes Mar 10, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@0xFelix 0xFelix left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: 0xFelix

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

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 10, 2023
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot merged commit 27bd06d into kubevirt:master Mar 10, 2023
@akrejcir akrejcir deleted the fix-crypt-tests branch March 10, 2023 14:34
@akrejcir
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/cherry-pick release-v0.17

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2023
Merged
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@akrejcir: new pull request created: #519

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-v0.17

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dominikholler dominikholler dominikholler left review comments

@lyarwood lyarwood lyarwood approved these changes

@0xFelix 0xFelix 0xFelix approved these changes

@ksimon1 ksimon1 Awaiting requested review from ksimon1

Assignees

@lyarwood lyarwood

@0xFelix 0xFelix

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/S
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@akrejcir @dominikholler @0xFelix @kubevirt-bot @lyarwood