Bug 1829959: [release-4.3] Introduce IBMCloud provider, skip/fix tests #24829
Conversation
|
@csrwng: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. 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. |
test/extended/util/test.go
Outdated
| `\[Feature:OAuthServer\] OAuth server has the correct token and certificate fallback semantics`, | ||
|
|
||
| // Requires oauth-openshift route in cluster. In ROKS, the oauth server lives outside of the cluster | ||
| `\[Feature:OAuthServer\] well-known endpoint should be reachable`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fix this and not skip it.
test/extended/util/test.go
Outdated
| // Requires the kube-control-plane-signer secret which is not present in a ROKS cluster | ||
| `\[Feature:OAuthServer\] OAuth server has the correct token and certificate fallback semantics`, | ||
|
|
||
| // Requires oauth-openshift route in cluster. In ROKS, the oauth server lives outside of the cluster |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should fix test to use alternate endpoint vs route
test/extended/util/test.go
Outdated
| `\[sig-auth\] \[Feature:NodeAuthenticator\] The kubelet can delegate ServiceAccount tokens to the API server`, | ||
|
|
||
| // Node approval in ROKS is not handled in cluster | ||
| `node client cert requests armoring: node-approver SA token compromised, don't approve random CSRs with client auth`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add the skip in the test based on platform for any openshift test
| `\[sig-auth\] \[Feature:NodeAuthorizer\] Getting an existing configmap should exit with the Forbidden error`, | ||
| `\[sig-auth\] \[Feature:NodeAuthorizer\] Getting an existing secret should exit with the Forbidden error`, | ||
|
|
||
| // Access to node external address is blocked from pods within a ROKS cluster by Calico |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should have a bug on our side to go fix upstream
|
|
||
| // The cluster-network-operator creates the kube-proxy daemonset pods without mem/cpu requests, | ||
| // resulting in a qosClass of BestEffort | ||
| `\[Feature:Platform\] Managed cluster should ensure control plane pods do not run in best-effort QoS`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
set to 1/2 of openshift-sdn and fix in our code.
|
|
||
| // The cluster-network-operator creates the kube-proxy daemonset pods without mem/cpu requests, | ||
| // resulting in a qosClass of BestEffort | ||
| `\[Feature:Platform\] Managed cluster should ensure control plane pods do not run in best-effort QoS`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Open bug for network-cluster-operator.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Set requests to half of what openshift-sdn is using
|
fwiw @csrwng https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/24829/files#diff-f4a17e7c84ee9f2a9cb2d480ebc033e9 lines up with my recollection of what was discussed |
csrwng
force-pushed
the
ibmcloud_support
branch
4 times, most recently
from
a985200
to
7141c47
Compare
csrwng
force-pushed
the
ibmcloud_support
branch
7 times, most recently
from
dfd2a8c
to
ba3e537
Compare
csrwng
force-pushed
the
ibmcloud_support
branch
from
ba3e537
to
8fe4b9f
Compare
csrwng
force-pushed
the
ibmcloud_support
branch
from
8fe4b9f
to
0bdee08
Compare
csrwng
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
bugzilla/severity-medium
|
@csrwng: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1829959, which is invalid:
Comment 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. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
bugzilla/invalid-bug
|
@csrwng: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1829959, which is invalid:
Comment 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. |
|
/bugzilla refresh |
openshift-ci-robot
added
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
@csrwng: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1829959, 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. 6 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. |
|
/retest |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: csrwng, derekwaynecarr 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-robot
added
the
approved
|
/test e2e-gcp |
|
/test e2e-gcp-upgrade |
sdodson
added
the
cherry-pick-approved
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
3 similar comments
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@csrwng: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: openshift/origin#24829. Bugzilla bug 1829959 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. |
Part of openshift/origin#24829 there are a bunch of testcases got modified with the additional tag [Skipped:ibmcloud], this PR to fix the exclude test with the modified testcase list
Backport of #24817