All code must use the context from Ginkgo when doing API calls or polling for a
change, otherwise the code would not return immediately when the test gets
aborted.
Every ginkgo callback should return immediately when a timeout occurs or the
test run manually gets aborted with CTRL-C. To do that, they must take a ctx
parameter and pass it through to all code which might block.
This is a first automated step towards that: the additional parameter got added
with
sed -i 's/\(framework.ConformanceIt\|ginkgo.It\)\(.*\)func() {$/\1\2func(ctx context.Context) {/' \
$(git grep -l -e framework.ConformanceIt -e ginkgo.It )
$GOPATH/bin/goimports -w $(git status | grep modified: | sed -e 's/.* //')
log_test.go was left unchanged.
- update all the import statements
- run hack/pin-dependency.sh to change pinned dependency versions
- run hack/update-vendor.sh to update go.mod files and the vendor directory
- update the method signatures for custom reporters
Signed-off-by: Dave Chen <dave.chen@arm.com>
As described in 8c76845b03 ("test/e2e/network: fix a bug in the hostport e2e
test") if we have two pods with the same hostPort, hostIP, but different
protocols, a CNI may be buggy and decide to forward all traffic only to one of
these pods. Add a check that we receiving requests from different pods.
Co-authored-by: Antonio Ojea <antonio.ojea.garcia@gmail.com>
The hostport e2e test (sonobuoy run --e2e-focus 'validates that there is no
conflict between pods with same hostPort but different hostIP and protocol')
checks, in particular, that two pods with the same hostPort, the same hostIP,
but different L4 protocols can coexist on one node.
In order to do this, the test creates two pods with the same hostIP:hostPort,
one TCP-based, another UDP-based. However, both pods listen on both protocols:
netexec --http-port=8080 --udp-port=8080
This can happen that a CNI which doesn't distinguish between TCP and UDP
hostPorts forwards all traffic, TCP or UDP, to the same pod. As this pod
listens on both protocols it will reply to both requests, and the test
will think that everything works properly while the second pod is indeed
disconnected. Fix this by executing different commands in different pods:
TCP: netexec --http-port=8080 --udp-port=-1
UDP: netexec --http-port=8008 --udp-port=8080
The TCP pod now doesn't listen on UDP, and the UDP pod doesn't listen on TCP on
the target hostPort. The UDP pod still needs to listen on TCP on another port
so that a pod readiness check can be made.
* De-share the Handler struct in core API
An upcoming PR adds a handler that only applies on one of these paths.
Having fields that don't work seems bad.
This never should have been shared. Lifecycle hooks are like a "write"
while probes are more like a "read". HTTPGet and TCPSocket don't really
make sense as lifecycle hooks (but I can't take that back). When we add
gRPC, it is EXPLICITLY a health check (defined by gRPC) not an arbitrary
RPC - so a probe makes sense but a hook does not.
In the future I can also see adding lifecycle hooks that don't make
sense as probes. E.g. 'sleep' is a common lifecycle request. The only
option is `exec`, which requires having a sleep binary in your image.
* Run update scripts
The test "validates that there is no conflict between pods with same
hostPort but different hostIP and protocol" was testing the scheduler
capability to schedule pods on the same node with hostPorts, however,
it wasn´t validating that the HostPorts was working, causing false
positives, because the pods were scheduled, but the HostPort exposed
wasn´t working.
In order to test the HostPort functionality, we have to use HostNetwork
pods, that are incompatible with Windows platforms. Also, since this
is touching both network and scheduling, there is no clear the ownership,
but sig-network is happy to adopt it.
We also add a new test for scheduling only under "scheduling", so Windows
folks can use it to test the scheduled in that platform.
