Skip to content

Create e2e job for SDN multitenant mode #3707

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
Merged
openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2019
Merged

Create e2e job for SDN multitenant mode #3707

openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2019

Conversation

@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor

@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz commented May 7, 2019

This way we will be able to inject different values for SDN (potentially OVN)
when defining jobs that consume this template

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 7, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 8, 2019
@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz changed the title Parameterize networkType on cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml Create e2e job for SDN multitenant mode May 8, 2019
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 14, 2019

/retest

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented May 15, 2019

Seems reasonable.

Can you chat with DevEx and figure out the right way for failures to be reported?

@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 16, 2019

Chatted with DeVex, they say the only way to see failures is to just check Deck.

@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 16, 2019

/assign @smarterclayton

smarterclayton
smarterclayton reviewed May 23, 2019
View reviewed changes
ci-operator/jobs/openshift/origin/openshift-origin-periodics.yaml Outdated
Copy link
Contributor

@smarterclayton smarterclayton May 23, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should be structured like a release periodic, not a post submit periodic. We want to run tests on releases, not tests on branches.

Add this to openshift-release-release-4.2-periodics.yaml as release-....<same_as_others>...-e2e-aws-network-multitenant-4.2

Copy link
Contributor

@smarterclayton smarterclayton May 23, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You'll want to set the RELEASE_IMAGE_LATEST to registry.svc.ci.openshift.org/ocp/release:4.2

@squeed
Copy link
Contributor

squeed commented May 23, 2019

@smarterclayton do you have any ideas about how to raise failures for this? It's enough of an obscure use-case that I don't think there's a need to gate CI, but we shouldn't let this be failing for releases.

We have test coverage from QE too.

@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch from 9e2f7b3 to 677070f Compare May 24, 2019 10:04
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 24, 2019
@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch 3 times, most recently from 373524d to e8647ed Compare May 24, 2019 12:16
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 31, 2019
@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch from e8647ed to 84fdf4b Compare May 31, 2019 09:10
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 31, 2019
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 31, 2019

/retest

2 similar comments
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 31, 2019

/retest

@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented May 31, 2019

/retest

@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch from 84fdf4b to 6cd80e5 Compare June 4, 2019 13:12
@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch from 97b613f to 6e89c9f Compare July 9, 2019 15:36
@dcbw
Copy link
Contributor

dcbw commented Jul 9, 2019

@smarterclayton look better now?

@dcbw
Copy link
Contributor

dcbw commented Jul 9, 2019

/retest

@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz force-pushed the sdn_multitenant_job branch from 6e89c9f to a429d5f Compare July 9, 2019 22:35
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 10, 2019

/retest

2 similar comments
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 10, 2019

/retest

@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 10, 2019

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 10, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jul 10, 2019
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 11, 2019

/retest

1 similar comment
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 11, 2019

/retest

@smarterclayton smarterclayton mentioned this pull request Jul 15, 2019
Merged
@rcarrillocruz
Copy link
Contributor Author

rcarrillocruz commented Jul 15, 2019

/retest

smarterclayton
smarterclayton reviewed Jul 15, 2019
View reviewed changes
ci-operator/templates/openshift/installer/cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml Outdated
Copy link
Contributor

@smarterclayton smarterclayton Jul 15, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is the one above "${CLUSTER_NETWORK_MANIFEST}" and this one "$CLUSTER_NETWORK_MANIFEST"?

If they are both "${CLUSTER_NETWORK_MANIFEST}" you don't need to declare the pod env var because the template will inline this. There's nothing wrong with it, I just want to understand why you have it this way.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@rcarrillocruz rcarrillocruz Jul 15, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

no particular reason, i just mixed syntax. Since I didn't put a template variable, I did not even think about this. I will amend, and remove the envvar.

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

smarterclayton commented Jul 15, 2019

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 15, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Jul 15, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rcarrillocruz, smarterclayton

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 Jul 15, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit ea962c3 into openshift:master Jul 15, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Jul 15, 2019

@rcarrillocruz: Updated the following 3 configmaps:

  • prow-job-cluster-launch-installer-e2e configmap in namespace ci using the following files:
    • key cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml using file ci-operator/templates/openshift/installer/cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml
  • prow-job-cluster-launch-installer-e2e configmap in namespace ci-stg using the following files:
    • key cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml using file ci-operator/templates/openshift/installer/cluster-launch-installer-e2e.yaml
  • job-config-misc configmap in namespace ci using the following files:
    • key openshift-release-release-4.2-periodics.yaml using file ci-operator/jobs/openshift/release/openshift-release-release-4.2-periodics.yaml
Details

In response to this:

This way we will be able to inject different values for SDN (potentially OVN)
when defining jobs that consume this template

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
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Jul 15, 2019

@rcarrillocruz: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/rehearse/cri-o/cri-o/release-1.13/e2e-aws 29f2bd5 link /test pj-rehearse
ci/rehearse/openshift/cluster-api-provider-azure/master/e2e-azure 29f2bd5 link /test pj-rehearse
ci/prow/pj-rehearse 29f2bd5 link /test pj-rehearse

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@aaronlevy aaronlevy Awaiting requested review from aaronlevy

@flaper87 flaper87 Awaiting requested review from flaper87

3 more reviewers

@squeed squeed squeed left review comments

@smarterclayton smarterclayton smarterclayton requested changes

@abhinavdahiya abhinavdahiya abhinavdahiya left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@smarterclayton smarterclayton

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. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants

@rcarrillocruz @squeed @danwinship @dcbw @smarterclayton @openshift-ci-robot @abhinavdahiya @openshift-merge-robot