OCPBUGS-77990: Skip upstream flaking test#2620
OCPBUGS-77990: Skip upstream flaking test#2620haircommander wants to merge 1 commit intoopenshift:masterfrom
Conversation
until an upstream solution is agreed upon Signed-off-by: Peter Hunt <pehunt@redhat.com>
openshift-ci-robot
added
backports/unvalidated-commits
|
@haircommander: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-77990, which is invalid:
Comment The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
@haircommander: the contents of this pull request could not be automatically validated. The following commits could not be validated and must be approved by a top-level approver:
Comment |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
kind/failing-test
WalkthroughA new test entry is added to the disabled tests list in the k8s-tests-ext command. The test "[sig-node] [Serial] Pod InPlace Resize Container (deferred-resizes) [FeatureGate:InPlacePodVerticalScaling] pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-2" is now marked as disabled with a reference to OCPBUGS-77990. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes Important Pre-merge checks failedPlease resolve all errors before merging. Addressing warnings is optional. ❌ Failed checks (1 error, 1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Tip Try Coding Plans. Let us write the prompt for your AI agent so you can ship faster (with fewer bugs). Comment |
|
@haircommander: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-77990, which is invalid:
Comment DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
openshift-hack/cmd/k8s-tests-ext/disabled_tests.go (1)
166-168: Keep the Jira-to-test mapping unambiguous.Right now Line 168 sits under both
OCPBUGS-63132andOCPBUGS-77990, so it’s unclear whetherpod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3is still tracked by the old bug or was intended to move under the new one. Please keep each bug comment directly adjacent to only the test(s) it owns.Suggested cleanup
- // https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-63132 - // https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-77990 - "[sig-node] [Serial] Pod InPlace Resize Container (deferred-resizes) [FeatureGate:InPlacePodVerticalScaling] pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-2", - "[sig-node] [Serial] Pod InPlace Resize Container (deferred-resizes) [FeatureGate:InPlacePodVerticalScaling] pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3", + // https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-63132 + "[sig-node] [Serial] Pod InPlace Resize Container (deferred-resizes) [FeatureGate:InPlacePodVerticalScaling] pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3", + // https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-77990 + "[sig-node] [Serial] Pod InPlace Resize Container (deferred-resizes) [FeatureGate:InPlacePodVerticalScaling] pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-2",🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@openshift-hack/cmd/k8s-tests-ext/disabled_tests.go` around lines 166 - 168, The test entry "pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3" is currently listed under both OCPBUGS-63132 and OCPBUGS-77990 which makes ownership ambiguous; edit the disabled tests list so each Jira comment sits immediately above only the test(s) it owns—either move "pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3" so it sits directly beneath the intended Jira comment (OCPBUGS-63132 or OCPBUGS-77990) or duplicate the comment appropriately if both bugs genuinely track different aspects, and ensure the surrounding list entries in the same disabledTests slice/array reflect that one-to-one mapping.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Nitpick comments:
In `@openshift-hack/cmd/k8s-tests-ext/disabled_tests.go`:
- Around line 166-168: The test entry "pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3" is
currently listed under both OCPBUGS-63132 and OCPBUGS-77990 which makes
ownership ambiguous; edit the disabled tests list so each Jira comment sits
immediately above only the test(s) it owns—either move
"pod-resize-retry-deferred-test-3" so it sits directly beneath the intended Jira
comment (OCPBUGS-63132 or OCPBUGS-77990) or duplicate the comment appropriately
if both bugs genuinely track different aspects, and ensure the surrounding list
entries in the same disabledTests slice/array reflect that one-to-one mapping.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository: openshift/coderabbit/.coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 6930113e-5c14-451f-9a15-bd4e78ad248d
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
openshift-hack/cmd/k8s-tests-ext/disabled_tests.go
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: haircommander The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/jira refresh |
openshift-ci-robot
added
jira/valid-bug
|
@haircommander: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-77990, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/retest |
|
@haircommander: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/payload-job periodic-ci-openshift-release-main-nightly-4.22-e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-one-core-serial |
|
@Chandan9112: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/50713690-3897-11f1-8dbb-a359252ae8c8-0 |
|
/payload-job periodic-ci-openshift-release-main-nightly-4.22-e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-one-core-serial |
|
@Chandan9112: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/f0d05de0-396a-11f1-96e1-f9e4789fbe4c-0 |
3 participants
until an upstream solution is agreed upon
What type of PR is this?
/kind failing-test
What this PR does / why we need it:
related to kubernetes#134458
Which issue(s) this PR is related to:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:
Summary by CodeRabbit