MGMT-11156: Cluster validation, merge the print and validate methods #4130
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
openshift-ci
bot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
2 times, most recently
from
408f6c4
to
7b1c542
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
size/L
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4130 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 65.89% 66.10% +0.20%
==========================================
Files 188 189 +1
Lines 26523 26688 +165
==========================================
+ Hits 17477 17641 +164
+ Misses 7446 7440 -6
- Partials 1600 1607 +7
|
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
4 times, most recently
from
d6468af
to
52c508a
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
size/XL
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
2 times, most recently
from
b8a5f49
to
592c154
Compare
paul-maidment
changed the title
|
/retest |
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
3 times, most recently
from
5a0b7e9
to
0d96ff6
Compare
21 tasks
paul-maidment
changed the title
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
from
0d96ff6
to
27560b7
Compare
|
/test edge-e2e-ai-operator-ztp-capi |
|
/test edge-e2e-metal-assisted-day2 |
gamli75
approved these changes
Jul 21, 2022
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
8 times, most recently
from
f27e172
to
00cca33
Compare
carbonin
reviewed
Aug 9, 2022
internal/cluster/validator.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
414
to
420
| if !validationStatusToBool(clusterCidrDefined) || !validationStatusToBool(serviceCidrDefined) { | ||
| status = ValidationPending | ||
| } else { | ||
| machineCidrDefined, _ := v.isMachineCidrDefined(c) | ||
| machineNetworkRequired := network.IsMachineNetworkRequired(c.cluster) | ||
| if machineNetworkRequired && !validationStatusToBool(machineCidrDefined) { | ||
| status = ValidationPending |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you could probably combine this with the message handling and return early, no?
network.IsMachineNetworkRequired is checking user managed networking so it'd imagine it's more accurate than the check below.
Comment on lines
+500
to
+503
| if synced { | ||
| return ValidationSuccess, "No ntp problems found" | ||
| } | ||
| return ValidationFailure, fmt.Sprintf("Hosts' clocks are not synchronized (there's more than a %d minutes gap between clocks), "+ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Small nit, but whenever possible I think the success case should be the least indented. So I'd reverse this.
Suggested change
| if synced { | |
| return ValidationSuccess, "No ntp problems found" | |
| } | |
| return ValidationFailure, fmt.Sprintf("Hosts' clocks are not synchronized (there's more than a %d minutes gap between clocks), "+ | |
| if !synced { | |
| return ValidationFailure, fmt.Sprintf("Hosts' clocks are not synchronized (there's more than a %d minutes gap between clocks), "+ | |
| } | |
| return ValidationSuccess, "No ntp problems found" |
Same as 4e04230 but for cluster validations instead of host validations The present implementation of cluster validation has a problem, it splits the validation into two phases. The validation and the printing of the validation message. This leads to a situation in some cases where it is not possible to use the output of a validation to determine the message that should be sent back to the user, there are some workarounds but these involve poor practices such as code repetition. This commit changes the validation to be a single method. Due to the complexity of the refactor, no effort has been made to make each of the validation methods their "most efficient" it is assumed that these fixes will take place in subsequent commits. Because the validation methods made heavy use of return statements, the style has had to be changed to an if/else style and some code has had to be reorganised a little. In theory, the existing tests should be sufficient to act as a "smoke" test for this functionality provided that there is enough coverage.
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
from
00cca33
to
36e076d
Compare
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
carbonin
requested changes
Aug 10, 2022
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
16
to
21
| /** | ||
| type clusterValidator struct { | ||
| log logrus.FieldLogger | ||
| hostAPI host.API | ||
| } | ||
| */ |
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
| } | ||
| */ | ||
|
|
||
| var _ = Describe("Validator tests", func() { |
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
| validator = clusterValidator{logrus.New(), nil} | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| Context("isNetworksSameAddressFamilies", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be the top-level Describe block.
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
| Context("isNetworksSameAddressFamilies", func() { | ||
|
|
||
| var preprocessContext *clusterPreprocessContext | ||
| clusterID := strfmt.UUID(uuid.New().String()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be in the BeforeEach
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
| preprocessContext = &clusterPreprocessContext{} | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| It("Machine network not required but no cluster or service network", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These test names should include the expected behavior.
Something like returns ValidationPending when cluster and service network are unset and required
internal/cluster/validator_test.go
Outdated
| Expect(message).Should(Equal("Bad CIDR(s) appears in one of the networks")) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| It("Machine networks contain bad CIDRs", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test name talks about bad CIDRs, but the check isn't the same as the one above about bad cidrs, I think it should be more specific.
| @@ -11,6 +12,7 @@ import ( | |||
| func TestCluster(t *testing.T) { | |||
| RegisterFailHandler(Fail) | |||
| common.InitializeDBTest() | |||
| time.Sleep(10 * time.Second) | |||
internal/cluster/validator.go
Outdated
| return ValidationError, "Bad CIDR(s) appears in one of the networks" | ||
| } | ||
| // serviceNetworkFamilies should only ever have a maximum of two distinct families. | ||
| // clusterNetworkFamilies may have multiple indistinct families so need to be canonized prior to comparison. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something I was confused about here was what "canonize" meant.
Maybe that's worth explaining too?
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
from
054bb59
to
aa46e27
Compare
carbonin
approved these changes
Aug 10, 2022
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: carbonin, gamli75, paul-maidment 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 |
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
/retest |
paul-maidment
force-pushed
the
MGMT-11156
branch
from
aa46e27
to
6742bb5
Compare
|
/lgtm |
|
@paul-maidment: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
danielerez
pushed a commit
to danielerez/assisted-service
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 15, 2023
…penshift#4130) * MGMT-11156: Cluster validation, merge the print and validate methods Same as 4e04230 but for cluster validations instead of host validations The present implementation of cluster validation has a problem, it splits the validation into two phases. The validation and the printing of the validation message. This leads to a situation in some cases where it is not possible to use the output of a validation to determine the message that should be sent back to the user, there are some workarounds but these involve poor practices such as code repetition. This commit changes the validation to be a single method. Due to the complexity of the refactor, no effort has been made to make each of the validation methods their "most efficient" it is assumed that these fixes will take place in subsequent commits. Because the validation methods made heavy use of return statements, the style has had to be changed to an if/else style and some code has had to be reorganised a little. In theory, the existing tests should be sufficient to act as a "smoke" test for this functionality provided that there is enough coverage. * MGMT-11156: Adding tests for isNetworksSameAddressFamilies in validator
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Same as 4e04230 but for cluster validations instead of host validations
The present implementation of cluster validation has a problem, it splits the validation into two phases. The validation and the printing of the validation message.
This leads to a situation in some cases where it is not possible to use the output of a validation to determine the message that should be sent back to the user, there are some workarounds but these involve poor practices such as code repetition.
This commit changes the validation to be a single method. Due to the complexity of the refactor, no effort has been made to make each of the validation methods their "most efficient" it is assumed that these fixes will take place in subsequent commits.
Because the validation methods made heavy use of return statements, the style has had to be changed to an if/else style and some code has had to be reorganised a little.
In theory, the existing tests should be sufficient to act as a "smoke" test for this functionality provided that there is enough coverage.
List all the issues related to this PR
What environments does this code impact?
How was this code tested?
Assignees
/cc @tsorya
/cc @ori-amizur
Checklist
docs, README, etc)Reviewers Checklist