Skip to content

document (and fixup) sig-network e2e features #124423

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
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 21, 2024
Merged

document (and fixup) sig-network e2e features #124423

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 21, 2024

Conversation

danwinship
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup
/kind documentation

What this PR does / why we need it:

Noticed all the TODOs in test/e2e/feature/feature.go and tried to document them.

This highlights the fact that some of them may be slightly dubious as features?

(Note: #124420 removes feature.IngressScale, #124421 removes feature.PodHostIPs, and #124422 fixes the usage of feature.NetworkingDNS to match the definition here.)

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

/cc @pohly @aojea

@danwinship
Remove unnecessary e2e feature.UDP
a1c1ef3 
[Feature:UDP] was probably added in the past by analogy to
[Feature:SCTP], but is unnecessary since UDP support has always been
required.
@danwinship
Document sig-network e2e features
52e8815
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from aojea and pohly April 20, 2024 15:40
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Apr 20, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. area/network-policy Issues or PRs related to Network Policy subproject area/test sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Apr 20, 2024
pohly
pohly reviewed Apr 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@pohly pohly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for taking the time to go through this. Now I just need to get the other SIGs to do the same 😄

Oh, and do it myself (DynamicResourceAllocation)...

test/e2e/feature/feature.go
// TODO: document the feature (owning SIG, when to use this feature for a test)
// Owner: sig-network
// Marks a single test that creates potentially-disruptive amounts of network
// traffic between nodes.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we extend the definition of Feature: to cover this case?

This looks like it was chosen because of the default skip for anything that starts with Feature:, which kind of makes sense - it's just a bit odd.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I don't know if we should be doing this, but we definitely are doing this, so I documented it...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, makes sense.

In kubernetes/enhancements#3042 (comment) and elswhere around that KEP we were discussing naming of Feature: vs. FeatureGate:.

In the light of this particular usage here I believe Special: might be a better name: "this test needs special cluster configurations to pass and/or exhibits special behavior that makes it unsuitable for normal testing". However, I also believe that renaming it is not worth the churn.

Instead, I'll add some additional comments to kubernetes/community#7824

/cc @aojea

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, this test is a bit hard to qualify as e2e and here, it is also duplicated in https://github.com/kubernetes/perf-tests , that is a best place for these kind of tests ... but I remember at RedHat some people used it so maybe keeping as is is ok

@pohly
Copy link
Contributor

pohly commented Apr 21, 2024

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@danwinship: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-nftables 52e8815 link false /test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-nftables
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-network-policies 52e8815 link false /test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-network-policies
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-ipvs 52e8815 link false /test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-ipvs

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.

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.

@aojea
Copy link
Member

aojea commented Apr 21, 2024

/lgtm
/approve

Those jobs are having known issues

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 21, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: c944f95b5b43e5002367cfa82883f04eafa96770

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, danwinship

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 01b2e12 into kubernetes:master Apr 21, 2024
18 of 21 checks passed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.31 milestone Apr 21, 2024
@danwinship danwinship deleted the network-e2e-features branch April 22, 2024 02:06
@pohly pohly mentioned this pull request Apr 22, 2024
Merged
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@pohly pohly pohly left review comments

@aojea aojea Awaiting requested review from aojea

Assignees

@aojea aojea

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/network-policy Issues or PRs related to Network Policy subproject area/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.31
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@danwinship @k8s-ci-robot @pohly @aojea