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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Add RoundTrip to Conversion Integration Test #6439

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 5, 2023
Merged

Add RoundTrip to Conversion Integration Test #6439

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 5, 2023

Conversation

JeromeJu
Copy link
Member

@JeromeJu JeromeJu commented Mar 27, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Changes

This commit refines the conversion test by adding RoundTrip to conversion_integration test as one of
the prerequisites for v1 storage version swap.
It aims to prevent unexpected issues of converting back and forth between v1beta1 and v1 storage version
from happening. ie. the unexpected nondeterministic PipelineRunStatus conversion issue

/kind misc
part of #5541

Submitter Checklist

As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:

  • [n/a] Has Docs included if any changes are user facing
  • [n/a] Has Tests included if any functionality added or changed
  • Follows the commit message standard
  • Meets the Tekton contributor standards (including
    functionality, content, code)
  • Has a kind label. You can add one by adding a comment on this PR that contains /kind <type>. Valid types are bug, cleanup, design, documentation, feature, flake, misc, question, tep
  • [n/a] Release notes block below has been updated with any user facing changes (API changes, bug fixes, changes requiring upgrade notices or deprecation warnings)
  • [n/a] Release notes contains the string "action required" if the change requires additional action from users switching to the new release

Release Notes

NONE

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. kind/misc Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 27, 2023
@JeromeJu JeromeJu mentioned this pull request Mar 27, 2023
Closed
@dibyom
Copy link
Member

dibyom commented Mar 27, 2023

/test check-pr-has-kind-label

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@dibyom: The specified target(s) for /test were not found.
The following commands are available to trigger required jobs:

  • /test pull-tekton-pipeline-alpha-integration-tests
  • /test pull-tekton-pipeline-beta-integration-tests
  • /test pull-tekton-pipeline-build-tests
  • /test pull-tekton-pipeline-integration-tests
  • /test tekton-pipeline-unit-tests

The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:

  • /test pull-tekton-pipeline-go-coverage

Use /test all to run all jobs.

In response to this:

/test check-pr-has-kind-label

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.

@JeromeJu
Copy link
Member Author

There seems no way to leverage the client to convert the fetched CRDs back, so this commit uses the ConvertFrom and ConvertTo directly on the fetched CRDs.

lbernick
lbernick approved these changes Mar 28, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@lbernick lbernick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@JeromeJu can you please link an issue?

test/conversion_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/conversion_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/conversion_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: lbernick

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

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 28, 2023
@JeromeJu
Add RoundTrip to Conversion Integration Test
da2e86a 
This commit refines the conversion test by adding RoundTrip to  test as one of
the prerequisites for v1 storage version swap.
It aims to prevent unexpected issues of converting back and forth between  and  storage version
from happening.
@JeromeJu JeromeJu mentioned this pull request Apr 4, 2023
Closed
Yongxuanzhang
Yongxuanzhang reviewed Apr 4, 2023
View reviewed changes
test/conversion_test.go
if d := cmp.Diff(v1TaskExpected, v1TaskGot, filterMetadata...); d != "" {
t.Fatalf("-want, +got: %v", d)
t.Errorf("-want, +got: %v", d)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we could use diff.PrintWantGot(d), but this should be fine.

test/conversion_test.go
Comment on lines +661 to +662
// requests it by v1Clients to compare with v1 if the conversion has been correctly
// executed by the webhook for roundtrip. And then it creates the v1 Task CRD using v1Clients
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just curious about this test, correct me if I'm wrong
it tests:

  1. v1beta1->v1->v1beta1
    2)v1->v1beta1->v1
    I wonder if we need the 2) test case? Since it is covered in 1)? 🤔

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks, good question:) I think this is necessary because for the roundTrip we would like to check if the conversion for results from the first step would lead to Error.
eg. for the 2nd case, when we call ConvertFrom v1 CRD -> converted v1beta1 CRD, then we test if the result could be ConvertTo-ed v1 CRD

Also since the storedVersion is going to get swapped and we would want to avoid issues converting back and forth start from either version.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That sg!

@Yongxuanzhang
Copy link
Member

/assign

@Yongxuanzhang
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 5, 2023
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit 633fd87 into tektoncd:main Apr 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Yongxuanzhang Yongxuanzhang Yongxuanzhang left review comments

@lbernick lbernick lbernick approved these changes

@abayer abayer Awaiting requested review from abayer

@bobcatfish bobcatfish Awaiting requested review from bobcatfish

Assignees

@Yongxuanzhang Yongxuanzhang

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/misc Categorizes issue or PR as a miscellaneuous one. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@JeromeJu @dibyom @tekton-robot @Yongxuanzhang @lbernick