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

Bug 1917942: canary: Check canary service for nil elements #533

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 20, 2021

Conversation

sgreene570
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 19, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@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
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.7.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.7.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1917942: canary: Check canary service for nil elements

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.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 19, 2021
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.
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jan 19, 2021

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 19, 2021
@@ -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 {
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor Author

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor Author

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit eea3761 into openshift:master Jan 20, 2021
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sgreene570: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 1917942 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1917942: canary: Check canary service for nil elements

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.

@candita
Copy link
Contributor

candita commented Jan 20, 2021

/lgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants