Skip to content

Conversation

@cevich
Copy link
Member

@cevich cevich commented May 23, 2019

Depends on #3078 and #3239

CIRRUS: TEST IMAGES

Signed-off-by: Chris Evich cevich@redhat.com

@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented May 23, 2019

note to me: The new image-check script should fail until #3192 merges

@cevich cevich changed the title Cirrus: More tests to verify cache_images WIP: Cirrus: More tests to verify cache_images May 23, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 23, 2019
@cevich cevich force-pushed the check_image branch 3 times, most recently from 056281f to 6c445c5 Compare May 30, 2019 14:44
@cevich cevich changed the title WIP: Cirrus: More tests to verify cache_images Cirrus: More tests to verify cache_images May 31, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label May 31, 2019
@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented May 31, 2019

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 31, 2019
@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented May 31, 2019

Note: Need to resolve mount-options issue first before merging this.

@edsantiago mind taking a peek while we wait? I'm not sure if I should unify the original check function you wrote, and the new one here (they're slightly different). Also, I'm sure you'll spot some "better ideas" for some of my bash-chicken-scratch 😄

Copy link
Member

@edsantiago edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm pretty swamped today so I only took a quick look at the topmost commit. test_okay is a little more complicated than I think it needs to be, but the test suite is comforting, thank you. Mostly lgtm. I did not review the other changes and cannot today.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think you mean tail, not head

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually 3 or 4

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This doesn't work if the test is invoked as ./contrib/etc, or ./lib.sh.t from the same directory, etc. (And, the test name is completely weird).

@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #3236) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 1, 2019
@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented Jun 3, 2019

Thanks Ed, yeah I know all about being swamped.

I'll see about simplifying test_okay (and read your other comments) later in the week.

@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Jun 8, 2019

@cevich Whats the latest on this PR?

@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented Jun 14, 2019

Actually, @edsantiago would you mind taking over this PR? I'm going to be out on vacation next week, and having this additional validation merged will come in handy should images need to be updated/changed.

The most super-important thing here is the disk-space check, that was a really difficult problem to solve[*] and if it ever sneaks back in, introduces a nasty, non-obvious testing flake.

[*]Actual fix is embedded in the base-image, however it can be overridden anytime (by static or dynamic cloud metadata).

@edsantiago
Copy link
Member

@cevich I was only able to get to this today, Thursday of a busy week, and it's taken me a long time to wrap my head around it. I think some of the code (mountopts) is no longer necessary. And, well, I just can't find a way to accept test_okay. It's a huge amount of complexity that could, IMO, be better handled by using the builtin test and better-worded diagnostics. When you get back, would you consider minimizing this a little, just making it the bare essentials?

@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented Jun 25, 2019

It's a huge amount of complexity that could, IMO, be better handled by using the builtin test and better-worded diagnostics.

Yep I believe that, was hoping you might wield thy +12 sword of complexity-cleavage to achieve the same end-goal.

It's okay though, there are other tests that could/should be added anyway. Like confirming ooe.sh is installed/executable, and that the google systemd services are enabled on boot:

google-accounts-daemon.service             enabled        
google-clock-skew-daemon.service           enabled        
google-instance-setup.service              enabled        
google-network-daemon.service              enabled        
google-shutdown-scripts.service            enabled        
google-startup-scripts.service             enabled        

@cevich cevich force-pushed the check_image branch 2 times, most recently from b4d6f6c to 3453ff9 Compare June 25, 2019 17:46
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/M and removed needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L labels Jun 25, 2019
@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented Jun 25, 2019

@edsantiago there, PTAL, I think you'll like this better.

Copy link
Member

@edsantiago edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, and much cleaner, thanks.

For the sake of sanity, could you change line 15 in the .t file?

-        echo "ok $testnum $3 = $MSG"
+        echo "ok $testnum $(echo $3) = $(echo $MSG)"

Signed-off-by: Chris Evich <cevich@redhat.com>
@edsantiago
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 26, 2019
@cevich
Copy link
Member Author

cevich commented Jun 26, 2019

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 26, 2019
@rhatdan
Copy link
Member

rhatdan commented Jun 27, 2019

/approve

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cevich, edsantiago, rhatdan

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details 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 Jun 27, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit fccf4ad into containers:master Jun 27, 2019
@cevich cevich deleted the check_image branch June 30, 2021 18:11
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 22, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 22, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants