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 1870469: Check for podName before displaying Task logs #6208

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Aug 20, 2020

Conversation

rottencandy
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-4273

Analysis / Root cause:
When checking logs for a failed PipelineRun that has not run any pods, a random pod log will be shown from any running pod.

Solution Description:
Ensure that podName is not empty in the pipelinerun spec before trying to display logs.

Browser conformance:

  • Chrome
  • Firefox
  • Safari
  • Edge

@rottencandy
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @andrewballantyne

@rottencandy
Copy link
Contributor Author

/kind bug

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Aug 6, 2020
@rottencandy
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ class PipelineRunLogs extends React.Component<PipelineRunLogsProps, PipelineRunL
)}
</div>
<div className="odc-pipeline-run-logs__container">
{activeItem ? (
{activeItem && resources[0].name ? (
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Checking for the name here seems a bit odd, a better approach would be to create the resources only when a pod exists.

const podName = taskRunFromYaml[activeItem]?.status?.podName;
const resources = taskCount > 0 && podName && [
      {
        name: podName,
        kind: 'Pod',
        namespace: obj.metadata.namespace,
        prop: `obj`,
        isList: false,
      },
    ];
Suggested change
{activeItem && resources[0].name ? (
{activeItem && resources ? (

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! Checking during resource creation is definitely better. I've updated with your suggestion.

Copy link
Contributor

@divyanshiGupta divyanshiGupta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 18, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@rohitkrai03 rohitkrai03 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: divyanshiGupta, rohitkrai03, rottencandy

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 approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 20, 2020
@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.

@rottencandy rottencandy changed the title Check for podName before displaying Task logs Bug 1870469: Check for podName before displaying Task logs Aug 20, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 20, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@rottencandy: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1870469, 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 (4.6.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.6.0)
  • bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1870469: Check for podName before displaying Task logs

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 bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 20, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit e1645d4 into openshift:master Aug 20, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@rottencandy: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: openshift/console#6208. Bugzilla bug 1870469 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1870469: Check for podName before displaying Task logs

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
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. component/dev-console Related to dev-console kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. 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

7 participants