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
Bug 1917942: canary: Check canary service for nil elements #533
Conversation
@sgreene570: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1917942, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
In response to this:
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. |
7f3cc24
to
81a19a8
Compare
pkg/operator/controller/canary/route.go: Check that the canary service is not nil and that the canary service has a non-empty spec.ports field when building the canary route via `desiredCanaryRoute` to avoid nil dereferences. pkg/operator/controller/canary/route_test.go: Ensure `desiredCanaryRoute` does not return any errors.
81a19a8
to
89e8bee
Compare
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Miciah, sgreene570 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 |
@@ -106,7 +110,10 @@ func TestCanaryRouteChanged(t *testing.T) { | |||
service := desiredCanaryService(daemonsetRef) | |||
|
|||
for _, tc := range testCases { | |||
original := desiredCanaryRoute(service) | |||
original, err := desiredCanaryRoute(service) | |||
if err != nil { |
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.
Consider adding a test case that produces an error, and checking tc.expect to make sure the error is expected.
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.
I thought about adding these, but didn't in the interest of time. Maybe that would be a good thing to add in a future cleanup? I could add these test cases to my current cleanup PR, #520.
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.
It should be quick to add a new function to exercise the validation in desiredCanaryRoute, and check that an error was produced for invalid input. It doesn't have to be a part of this function.
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.
See d6462c2 , which ive added to PR 520
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
@sgreene570: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1917942 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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. |
/lgtm |
pkg/operator/controller/canary/route.go:
Check that the canary service is not nil and that the canary service has a non-empty spec.ports field when building the canary route via
desiredCanaryRoute
to avoid nil dereferences.pkg/operator/controller/canary/route_test.go:
Ensure
desiredCanaryRoute
does not return any errors.These changes resolve BZ 1917942, in which canary controller panic's were observed in OpenShift CI.