Skip to content
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

Provide default values for ceph RBD. #969

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 1, 2020
Merged

Conversation

maya-r
Copy link
Contributor

@maya-r maya-r commented Nov 26, 2020

Release note:

Have the storage suggestion configmap suggest Block/RWX for ceph RBD

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. labels Nov 26, 2020
Copy link
Member

@tiraboschi tiraboschi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you please also add a unit test for this ensuring that HCO is properly covering the upgrade scenario (the ConfigMap was already there from a previous version and HCO should reconcile it adding the missing values)?

I tend to think that HCO is not going to reconcile that object.

@tiraboschi tiraboschi added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 26, 2020
@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Nov 26, 2020

hco-e2e-image-index-aws, hco-e2e-image-index-gcp lanes succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-image-index-aws, hco-e2e-image-index-gcp lanes succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

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.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Nov 26, 2020

hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-aws lane succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-upgrade-prev-azure

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.

@maya-r
Copy link
Contributor Author

maya-r commented Nov 26, 2020

Not sure how to run the upgrade tests.
I'm surprised they don't invoke the regular functional tests. Should I change them to do this?

@tiraboschi
Copy link
Member

Not sure how to run the upgrade tests.
I'm surprised they don't invoke the regular functional tests. Should I change them to do this?

I was simply asking for a unit test to ensure that HCO is really going to add the two new keys to that config map if the config map has been created in the past.
I added it in dea37da , please take a look.

The issue is that, as I was suspecting, HCO is not going to add the two new keys because HCO is currently not reconciling that object but just the CR for cdi-operator.

@hco-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

hco-bot commented Nov 26, 2020

hco-e2e-image-index-gcp, hco-e2e-image-index-aws lanes succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

@hco-bot: Overrode contexts on behalf of hco-bot: ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

In response to this:

hco-e2e-image-index-gcp, hco-e2e-image-index-aws lanes succeeded.
/override ci/prow/hco-e2e-image-index-azure

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.

Signed-off-by: Maya Rashish <[email protected]>

Add unit test (currently failing)

Signed-off-by: Simone Tiraboschi <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Maya Rashish <[email protected]>
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 1, 2020
@tiraboschi
Copy link
Member

/approve
/unhold

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 1, 2020
@kubevirt-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tiraboschi

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

@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 1, 2020
@kubevirt-bot kubevirt-bot merged commit 698a836 into kubevirt:master Dec 1, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has DCO signed all their commits. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants