🏃 migrate conformance test to Prow #759

sbueringer · 2021-02-28T14:46:13Z

test-infra PR has to be approved first: kubernetes/test-infra#21069

Also includes the v1alpha4 PR until it's merged

With this PR we have a Prow-based e2e test which creates a devstack in GCP instead of OpenLab (conformance test is almost the same)

/hold

k8s-ci-robot · 2021-02-28T14:46:23Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [sbueringer]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

hack/ci/e2e-conformance-gcp-cloud-init.yaml

jichenjc · 2021-03-01T02:42:48Z

recheck

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T04:56:21Z

/test ?

k8s-ci-robot · 2021-03-01T04:56:22Z

@sbueringer: The following commands are available to trigger jobs:

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-build
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-test
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-e2e-test
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

Use /test all to run the following jobs:

pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-build
pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-test

In response to this:

/test ?

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.

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T04:57:45Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T05:06:36Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T05:19:50Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T05:39:51Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T05:51:08Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T06:04:11Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T06:16:01Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T19:14:02Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T19:24:21Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T19:39:53Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T20:37:20Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T21:57:36Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-01T22:29:18Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-02T04:55:49Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-02T16:56:17Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-11T14:51:45Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

@hidekazuna @jichenjc This PR is now ready for review. Finally we will get stable e2e/conformance tests... :)

jichenjc · 2021-03-12T00:46:56Z

/lgtm

hidekazuna · 2021-03-12T00:34:33Z

hack/ci/e2e-conformance/e2e-conformance_patch.yaml.tpl

@@ -84,6 +84,14 @@ spec:
        echo "kubelet version: " $(kubelet --version)

        echo "$LINE_SEPARATOR"
+    users:


We moved to use OpenStack key pair, why do we need this?

I think some discussion has been previously
at least from my test, seems only this user can logon .. I might be wrong

I wasnt able to log in with the root user during testing, so I thought I make it easier by adding an additional user with pw which works in any case (also via vnc and password Login)

(because the root user ssh login is disabled)

I think you are not able to login to nodes due to dropbear in cirros 0.5.1.
After I copied openssh private key into bastion, I had to convert it to dropbear format by dropbearconvert command.

A set of PRs blocked (waiting) for this , it's not blocking issue, can we merge this and open a follow up issue?

Should be possible. I started working on: #782
There I add e2e tests and rewrite our conformance test to be executed with ClusterAPI test framework (like e.g. in CAPA)

I try to use the OpenStack SSH KeyPair mechanism there. Let's how it goes this time.

I think it shouldn't block this PR but I'm really wondering how the OpenStack ssh key solution works:
When I try to jump to a regular node (e.g. a control plane node):

root has the ssh key but blocks ssh

ubuntu does not have the ssh key in authorized keys

Anything special I have to consider when using the OpenStack keypair? (I'm just creating it in OpenStack and then trying to jump, but it cannot work if it's just added for the root user and the root user is blocked)

It is OK to add an user to use VNC when running test.
I think we can not login as root user. cirros user for cirros image, ubuntu user for ubuntu image.

But how do you do that with the openstack keypair feature? Cirros works for me but ubuntu does not

hack/ci/e2e-conformance/e2e-conformance_patch.yaml.tpl

scripts/ci-conformance.sh

hidekazuna · 2021-03-12T00:39:47Z

hack/ci/e2e-conformance-gcp-prepare.sh

+  openstack domain list
+
+  openstack flavor delete m1.tiny
+  openstack flavor create --ram 512 --disk 1 --vcpus 1 --public --id 1 m1.tiny --property hw_rng:allowed='True'


Do we still need --property hw_rng:allowed='True'?

As I'm still using devstack, I assume yes

hack/ci/e2e-conformance-gcp-cloud-init.yaml

sbueringer · 2021-03-12T04:57:59Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance

sbueringer · 2021-03-12T04:58:39Z

@jichenjc @hidekazuna review comments addressed - please take another look :)

sbueringer · 2021-03-12T08:29:12Z

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-openstack-make-conformance
(5 didn't work, 4 should)

sbueringer · 2021-03-15T10:54:40Z

@hidekazuna @jichenjc can we merge this pr? It would unblock a lot. We can continue the ssh discussion elsewhere

hidekazuna · 2021-03-15T12:41:22Z

@hidekazuna @jichenjc can we merge this pr? It would unblock a lot. We can continue the ssh discussion elsewhere

Sure

/hold cancel

/lgtm

sbueringer · 2021-03-15T12:42:20Z

/hold

sbueringer · 2021-03-15T12:47:41Z

@hidekazuna I forgot to squash (I didn't want to have 12 commits on master :)). Can you give me another /lgtm? Thx :)

hidekazuna · 2021-03-15T12:56:57Z

/lgtm

/hold cancel

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Feb 28, 2021

k8s-ci-robot requested review from detiber and Lion-Wei February 28, 2021 14:46

k8s-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 28, 2021

jichenjc mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2021

add e2e test jobs for sigs.k8s.io/cluster-api-provider-openstack kubernetes/test-infra#21069

Merged

jichenjc reviewed Mar 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

hack/ci/e2e-conformance-gcp-cloud-init.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sbueringer changed the title ~~🏃 migrate conformance test to Prow~~ [WIP] 🏃 migrate conformance test to Prow Mar 1, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 1, 2021

sbueringer force-pushed the caas/sbuerin/capi-prow-e2e branch from ee960cb to 28d062b Compare March 2, 2021 04:55

sbueringer force-pushed the caas/sbuerin/capi-prow-e2e branch from f67ddf3 to 662f4d8 Compare March 11, 2021 14:50

sbueringer mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2021

🏃 Bump zuul jobs to k8s 1.20 #780

Closed

k8s-ci-robot assigned jichenjc Mar 12, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 12, 2021

hidekazuna reviewed Mar 12, 2021

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 12, 2021

sbueringer mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2021

✨ Update klog dependency to v2 #779

Merged

chrischdi mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2021

✨ pkg/cloud/services/networking/securitygroups.go reimplement reconcilation #773

Merged

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 15, 2021

k8s-ci-robot assigned hidekazuna Mar 15, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 15, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 15, 2021

migrate conformance test to prow

c7aec80

sbueringer force-pushed the caas/sbuerin/capi-prow-e2e branch from 250d2bb to c7aec80 Compare March 15, 2021 12:47

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 15, 2021

k8s-ci-robot added lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Mar 15, 2021

k8s-ci-robot merged commit 784bccb into kubernetes-sigs:master Mar 15, 2021

sbueringer deleted the caas/sbuerin/capi-prow-e2e branch March 15, 2021 14:09

sbueringer mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2021

Using OpenStack keypair to access a Kubernetes node #784

Closed

🏃 migrate conformance test to Prow #759

🏃 migrate conformance test to Prow #759

Uh oh!

Conversation

sbueringer commented Feb 28, 2021

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 28, 2021

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jichenjc commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 1, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 2, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 2, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 11, 2021

Uh oh!

jichenjc commented Mar 12, 2021

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 12, 2021

Uh oh!

sbueringer commented Mar 12, 2021

sbueringer commented Mar 12, 2021 •

edited

Loading