-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40.9k
e2e: serial: node cpumanager parity with the old suite #132498
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.
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
e2e: serial: node cpumanager parity with the old suite #132498
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ffromani 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 |
Initially we added minimal quota disablement e2e tests, but since the emergence of kubevirt/kubevirt#14965 it becames clear that is better to have full coverage. This PR restores coverage parity with the old test suite. Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
The `ginkgo.ContinueOnFailure` decorator serves the usecase of the new cpumanager tests perfectly: https://onsi.github.io/ginkgo/#failure-handling-in-ordered-containers """ You can override this behavior by decorating an Ordered container with ContinueOnFailure. This is useful in cases where Ordered is being used to provide shared expensive set up for a collection of specs. When ContinueOnFailure is set, Ginkgo will continue running specs even if an earlier spec in the Ordered container has failed. """ And this is exactly the case at hand. Previously, without this decorator, subsequent failures were masked, which is dangerous and not what we want. Signed-off-by: Francesco Romani <[email protected]>
3251144
to
3b0fd32
Compare
/triage accepted |
sig-node CI meeting 20250625: agreement to add reduced (not 1:1) coverage for cgroup v1 |
Thanks @ffromani , ping @pravk03 , @natasha41575 , @Chunxia202410 and @AnishShah |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR aims completes (to the best to the author's knowledge) the feature parity of the new cpumanager testsuite with the old one. Most notably:
ContinueOnFailure
to avoid this while still keeping the benefits of theOrdered
suite (see code comments for details)Which issue(s) this PR is related to:
N/A
Special notes for your reviewer:
With this PR merged I think the rewrite is complete because all the items I had in my TODO are addressed. We can now have the final go/no-go conversation
Previous work
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?