Machine healthcheck tests #47
Conversation
|
Hi @cynepco3hahue. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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
needs-ok-to-test
|
@enxebre @ingvagabund Can you please run tests? |
|
/ok-to-test |
openshift-ci-robot
added
ok-to-test
Tests: - [Feature:MachineHealthCheck] MachineHealthCheck controller with node-unhealth-conditions configmap should delete unhealthy machine - [Feature:MachineHealthCheck] MachineHealthCheck controller should delete unhealthy machine Copy tests from the openshift/machine-api-operator#204
cynepco3hahue
force-pushed
the
machine-healthcheck-tests
branch
from
36e70c4 to
d1ea871
Compare
|
/retest |
|
@ingvagabund Does OpenShift CI has some problems, I can see |
|
/retest |
This happens from time to time |
|
/retest |
|
@cynepco3hahue the CI is currently broken. The issue is under investigation and being resolved. |
|
/retest |
|
@ingvagabund Great thanks for info. |
|
@ingvagabund I can see that Do you have an idea of why it happens? |
flaky test |
|
/retest |
| @@ -49,6 +49,10 @@ required = [ | |||
| name = "github.com/openshift/cluster-autoscaler-operator" | |||
| branch = "master" | |||
|
|
|||
| [[constraint]] | |||
| name = "github.com/openshift/machine-api-operator" | |||
| revision = "9650e16c98802a4b57b7551201b0973fcae2f738" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will cause a trouble in the mao repo itself. Though, we still may override the constraint. So good to go.
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ingvagabund 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
|
@cynepco3hahue thanks for the PR!!! |
| err = client.List(context.TODO(), &listOptions, workers) | ||
| Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred()) | ||
|
|
||
| numberOfReadyWorkers = 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This deserves its own function and put it into utils. There's a library meant to be reusable in infra/utils. So then ginkgo e2e user stories are abstracted and easy to read with out caring about details
| err = client.List(context.TODO(), &listOptions, machineList) | ||
| Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred()) | ||
|
|
||
| for i, m := range machineList.Items { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This deserves its own function and put it into utils. There's a library meant to be reusable in infra/utils. So then ginkgo e2e user stories are abstracted and easy to read with out caring about details
| } | ||
| Expect(workerMachine).ToNot(BeNil()) | ||
|
|
||
| if strings.Contains(workerMachine.Name, "kubemark") { |
|
@cynepco3hahue thanks! I didn't have the chance to review that, so dropped some comments for the record so we can translate into follow ups improvements |
Tests:
with node-unhealth-conditions configmap should delete unhealthy machine
should delete the unhealthy machine
Copy tests from the openshift/machine-api-operator#204