Add tests for adding/removing disks/nics to/from a vm template #3070
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@ | ||
| import { | ||
| createResource, | ||
| deleteResource, | ||
| deleteResources, | ||
| } from '@console/shared/src/test-utils/utils'; | ||
| import { get } from 'lodash'; | ||
| import { testName } from '@console/internal-integration-tests/protractor.conf'; | ||
| import { TEMPLATE_ACTIONS_TIMEOUT_SECS } from './utils/consts'; | ||
| import { basicVMConfig, multusNAD, hddDisk, networkInterface, rootDisk } from './utils/mocks'; | ||
| import { getProvisionConfigs } from './vm.wizard.configs'; | ||
| import { VirtualMachine } from './models/virtualMachine'; | ||
| import { VirtualMachineTemplate } from './models/virtualMachineTemplate'; | ||
| import { ProvisionConfig } from './utils/types'; | ||
| import { getResourceObject } from './utils/utils'; | ||
| import { ProvisionConfigName } from './utils/constants/wizard'; | ||
|
|
||
| describe('Test adding/removing discs/nics to/from a VM template', () => { | ||
| const provisionConfigContainer = getProvisionConfigs().get(ProvisionConfigName.CONTAINER); | ||
| const commonSettings = { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. it could incorporate all of these functions and configs, which are quite hard to read IMO |
||
| cloudInit: { | ||
| useCloudInit: false, | ||
| }, | ||
| namespace: testName, | ||
| description: `Default description ${testName}`, | ||
| flavor: basicVMConfig.flavor, | ||
| operatingSystem: basicVMConfig.operatingSystem, | ||
| workloadProfile: basicVMConfig.workloadProfile, | ||
| }; | ||
| const vmTemplateConfig = (name: string, provisionConfig: ProvisionConfig) => { | ||
| return { | ||
| ...commonSettings, | ||
| name, | ||
| provisionSource: provisionConfig.provision, | ||
| storageResources: [], | ||
| networkResources: [], | ||
| }; | ||
| }; | ||
| const vmConfig = (name: string, templateConfig) => { | ||
| return { | ||
| ...commonSettings, | ||
| startOnCreation: true, | ||
| name, | ||
| template: templateConfig.name, | ||
| provisionSource: templateConfig.provisionSource, | ||
| storageResources: [], | ||
| networkResources: [], | ||
| }; | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| const templateCfg = vmTemplateConfig( | ||
| `tmpl-${provisionConfigContainer.provision.method.toLowerCase()}`, | ||
| provisionConfigContainer, | ||
| ); | ||
| const vmTemplate = new VirtualMachineTemplate(templateCfg); | ||
|
|
||
| const vmCfg = vmConfig(`vmfromtmpl-${vmTemplate.name}`, templateCfg); | ||
| const vm = new VirtualMachine(vmCfg); | ||
|
|
||
| beforeAll(async () => { | ||
| createResource(multusNAD); | ||
| await vmTemplate.create(templateCfg); | ||
| }, TEMPLATE_ACTIONS_TIMEOUT_SECS); | ||
|
|
||
| afterAll(() => { | ||
| deleteResources([multusNAD, vmTemplate.asResource()]); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe('Test adding discs/nics to a VM template', () => { | ||
| vmCfg.startOnCreation = false; | ||
|
|
||
| beforeAll(async () => { | ||
| await vmTemplate.addDisk(hddDisk); | ||
| await vmTemplate.addNIC(networkInterface); | ||
| await vm.create(vmCfg); | ||
| }, TEMPLATE_ACTIONS_TIMEOUT_SECS); | ||
|
|
||
| afterAll(() => { | ||
| deleteResource(vm.asResource()); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it('Adds a disk to a VM template', async () => { | ||
| expect(vm.getAttachedDisks()).toContain(hddDisk); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it('Adds a NIC to a VM template', async () => { | ||
| expect(vm.getAttachedNICs()).toContain(networkInterface); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. the disadvantage of this approach is that Add NIC test will fail if adding disk fails in |
||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| xit('BZ(1779116) Clones disk defined in VM template', async () => { | ||
| const dataVolumeName = `${vm.name}-${vmTemplate.name}-${rootDisk.name}-clone`; | ||
| const dataVolume = getResourceObject(dataVolumeName, vm.namespace, 'datavolume'); | ||
| const srcPvc = get(dataVolume, 'spec.source.pvc.name', ''); | ||
| expect(srcPvc).toEqual(`${vmTemplate.name}-${rootDisk.name}`); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. after #3665 merges, we should check that it is not possible to remove url disk from the template list after the creation. edit: I guess deletion should be possible - not entirely sure about that. There was a problem hiding this comment. and that the vm source type equals to There was a problem hiding this comment. also, the naming will change a bit. There was a problem hiding this comment. we should also test that datavolume is not leaking after the template deletion There was a problem hiding this comment. now disabled, will be addressed in a different PR. |
||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| describe('Test removing discs/nics from a VM template', () => { | ||
| beforeAll(async () => { | ||
| await vmTemplate.removeDisk(hddDisk.name); | ||
| await vmTemplate.removeNIC(networkInterface.name); | ||
| await vm.create(vmCfg); | ||
| }, TEMPLATE_ACTIONS_TIMEOUT_SECS); | ||
|
|
||
| afterAll(() => { | ||
| deleteResource(vm.asResource()); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it('Removes a disk from VM template', async () => { | ||
| expect(vm.getAttachedDisks()).not.toContain(hddDisk); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| it('Removes a NIC from VM template', async () => { | ||
| expect(vm.getAttachedNICs()).not.toContain(networkInterface); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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 whole vmConfig creation is quite painful. the config is modified in 3 places
IMO, we should introduce builder pattern here with sensible defaults.
e.g
thoughts?
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.
Yes yes yes I agree 100%, I also hate that we need to pass the config twice, first to create the VirtualMachine object and then to the
createmethod.I'm not sure if this is the right time to do it though because we need to close one epic automation gap epic first and this would be a huge change.
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.
indeed, I agree it would be nicer but it is a big change in a late moment in the cycle. Lets address as a followup once the automation gap is closed.