The test required two APIs to be available to test for migration.
Keep it simple and use a variable "gv" on top of the function body
to easily swap the version to be tested once an old API is deleted.
e.g. currently v1beta3 is the "old" API, v1beta4 is the "new" one.
Ultimately, this test only makes sure that the expected kinds are
available post migration.
This runs workloads that are labeled as "integration-test". The apiserver and
scheduler are only started once per unique configuration, followed by each
workload using that configuration. This makes execution faster. In contrast to
benchmarking, we care less about starting with a clean slate for each test.
Merely deleting the namespace is not enough:
- Workloads might rely on the garbage collector to get rid of obsolete objects,
so we should run it to be on the safe side.
- Pods must be force-deleted because kubelet is not running.
- Finally, the namespace controller is needed to get rid of
deleted namespaces.
Update the template.pot file with the current state of the messages in kubectl. That allows localized messages to be updated accordingly and picked up correctly.
* Skip terminal Pods with a deletion timestamp from the Daemonset sync
Change-Id: I64a347a87c02ee2bd48be10e6fff380c8c81f742
* Review comments and fix integration test
Change-Id: I3eb5ec62bce8b4b150726a1e9b2b517c4e993713
* Include deleted terminal pods in history
Change-Id: I8b921157e6be1c809dd59f8035ec259ea4d96301
1aeec10efb removed iterating over containers in favor of iterating over pod
claims. This had the unintended consequence that NodePrepareResource gets
called unnecessarily when no container needs the claim. The more natural
behavior is to skip unused resources. This enables (theoretic, at this time)
use cases where some DRA driver relies on the controller part to influence
scheduling, but then doesn't use CDI with containers.
* test comment should match the code in podgc
* Update test/integration/podgc/podgc_test.go
Co-authored-by: Michał Woźniak <mimowo@users.noreply.github.com>
* test comment should match the code in podgc
---------
Co-authored-by: Michał Woźniak <mimowo@users.noreply.github.com>
The exception comments were added due to a false positive in
staticcheck. This has since been rectified.
Signed-off-by: Madhav Jivrajani <madhav.jiv@gmail.com>
This bump is done since the latest version of staticcheck includes
a fix for a false positive reported by us, discovered while bumping
to go1.20
Signed-off-by: Madhav Jivrajani <madhav.jiv@gmail.com>
For example, this is a false positive that currently exists in the code base:
test/e2e_node/dra_test.go:129:4: ginkgo-linter: use a function call in Consistently. This actually checks nothing, because Consistently receives the function returned value, instead of function itself, and this value is never changed; consider using `gomega.Consistently(ctx, e2epod.Get).WithArguments(f.ClientSet, pod).WithTimeout(podInPendingStateTimeout).Should(e2epod.BeInPhase(v1.PodPending),
"Pod should be in Pending state as resource preparation time outed")` instead (ginkgolinter)
gomega.Consistently(ctx, e2epod.Get(f.ClientSet, pod)).WithTimeout(podInPendingStateTimeout).Should(e2epod.BeInPhase(v1.PodPending),
^
It's a false positive because e2epod.Get returns the function that Consistently
is meant to call.
This could be worked around by assigning e2epod.Get(f.ClientSet, pod) to a
variable and then use that variable, but that is less readable.
