E2etest container conformance test #20415

liangchenye · 2016-02-01T13:51:13Z

blackbox test based on the pod interface exposed in 'client' .

googlebot · 2016-02-01T13:51:15Z

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll verify. Thanks.

If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.

k8s-bot · 2016-02-01T13:52:10Z

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? (reply "ok to test", or if you trust the user, reply "add to whitelist")

If this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

k8s-bot · 2016-02-01T13:53:10Z

Can one of the admins verify that this patch is reasonable to test? (reply "ok to test", or if you trust the user, reply "add to whitelist")

If this message is too spammy, please complain to ixdy.

k8s-github-robot · 2016-02-01T13:53:26Z

Labelling this PR as size/L

liangchenye · 2016-02-01T13:55:06Z

I signed it!

华为技术有限公司 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
[Company_logo]

Mobile: 13426107977
Email: liangchenye@huawei.com
http://www.huawei.com

本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组。禁
止任何其他人以任何形式使用（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发）本邮件中
的信息。如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件！
This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which
is intended only for the person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the
information contained herein in any way (including, but not limited to, total or partial
disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by
phone or email immediately and delete it!

发件人: googlebot [mailto:notifications@github.com]
发送时间: 2016年2月1日 21:52
收件人: kubernetes/kubernetes
抄送: liangchenye
主题: Re: [kubernetes] E2etest container conformance test (#20415)

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

[:memo:]Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed, please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll verify. Thanks.

If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA datahttps://cla.developers.google.com/clas and verify that your email is set on your git commitshttps://help.github.com/articles/setting-your-email-in-git/.
If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please let us know the company's name.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/20415#issuecomment-177979007.

googlebot · 2016-02-01T13:55:09Z

CLAs look good, thanks!

liangchenye · 2016-02-01T13:55:24Z

@pwittrock @Random-Liu , blackbox test bases on previous discussion.
Two testing container (one is valid, another fake one should be failed) .

pwittrock · 2016-02-03T02:54:59Z

@liangchenye Thanks. I was out sick today and will take a look tomorrow.

yifan-gu · 2016-02-03T07:41:26Z

subscribe @yifan-gu

kevin-wangzefeng · 2016-02-03T07:43:07Z

/cc @kubernetes/huawei

feiskyer · 2016-02-03T07:43:44Z

CC @kubernetes/sig-node

pwittrock · 2016-02-03T20:17:57Z

test/e2e_node/container.go

+	}
+}
+
+func createContainer(cl *client.Client, container api.Container) error {


since this creates pods, lets name it createPod

Instead of always passing the client into the functions, create a struct and make these methods for that struct

I prefer to use 'createContainer' since I want to test container, using pod is just the underling implementation way. Since new code will use method for struct, so it will just be 'Create'.

liangchenye · 2016-02-04T13:24:33Z

@pwittrock Thanks for correcting, commits with following updates:

method with conformancecontainer struct
two context
better logs and descriptions

k8s-bot · 2016-02-04T13:50:12Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit d500cdf76d8d678dd64c94f75742f45caf7a1133.

k8s-bot · 2016-02-04T14:05:10Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit a4fbe9f1a1ee98791a4c2764d6e1c9e047183bd4.

k8s-github-robot · 2016-02-04T22:55:46Z

PR needs rebase

pwittrock · 2016-02-26T18:26:52Z

@k8s-bot test node e2e experimental

pwittrock · 2016-02-26T19:02:52Z

@k8s-bot test node e2e experimental

pwittrock · 2016-02-26T19:48:07Z

Success:
http://goto.google.com/prkubekins/job/node-pull-build-e2e-test/31

k8s-github-robot · 2016-02-27T06:33:20Z

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

k8s-bot · 2016-02-27T07:04:05Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit e3861cd.

Please reference the list of currently known flakes when examining this failure. If you request a re-test, you must reference the issue describing the flake.

k8s-bot · 2016-02-27T07:48:17Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit e3861cd.

Please reference the list of currently known flakes when examining this failure. If you request a re-test, you must reference the issue describing the flake.

justinsb · 2016-02-27T23:16:07Z

@pwittrock
You must link to the test flake issue which caused you to request this manual re-test.
Re-test requests should be in the form of: k8s-bot test this issue: #<number>
Here is the list of open test flakes.

justinsb · 2016-02-28T00:39:06Z

I apologize for the above incorrect comments. I was working on the munger locally & it "went rogue" - see #22136. I am readding the LGTM label that was incorrectly removed.

liangchenye · 2016-02-29T01:11:16Z

@k8s-bot test this issue: #21244

k8s-bot · 2016-02-29T01:41:36Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit e3861cd.

Please reference the list of currently known flakes when examining this failure. If you request a re-test, you must reference the issue describing the flake.

k8s-bot · 2016-02-29T03:36:55Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit e3861cd.

Please reference the list of currently known flakes when examining this failure. If you request a re-test, you must reference the issue describing the flake.

liangchenye · 2016-02-29T03:46:56Z

@k8s-bot test this issue: #18738

k8s-bot · 2016-02-29T04:49:41Z

GCE e2e build/test failed for commit e3861cd.

Please reference the list of currently known flakes when examining this failure. If you request a re-test, you must reference the issue describing the flake.

Random-Liu · 2016-02-29T06:26:40Z

@k8s-bot e2e test this, issue: #20916

k8s-bot · 2016-02-29T06:54:57Z

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e3861cd.

Random-Liu · 2016-02-29T08:11:38Z

@liangchenye Congrats! The test finally passed...:)

liangchenye · 2016-02-29T08:17:11Z

@Random-Liu Thank you for the re-test help, time for the next PR now.

k8s-github-robot · 2016-02-29T14:54:39Z

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]

k8s-bot · 2016-02-29T15:28:01Z

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e3861cd.

k8s-github-robot · 2016-02-29T15:34:05Z

Automatic merge from submit-queue

Auto commit by PR queue bot

googlebot added the cla: no label Feb 1, 2016

k8s-github-robot assigned ixdy Feb 1, 2016

k8s-github-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 1, 2016

googlebot added cla: yes and removed cla: no labels Feb 1, 2016

ixdy assigned pwittrock and unassigned ixdy Feb 2, 2016

pwittrock reviewed Feb 3, 2016
View reviewed changes

dchen1107 added this to the v1.2 milestone Feb 4, 2016

k8s-github-robot added needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. and removed needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Feb 4, 2016

pwittrock added ok-to-merge lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed needs-ok-to-merge labels Feb 26, 2016

justinsb removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 27, 2016

justinsb added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 28, 2016

justinsb mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2016

I accidentally ran the munger locally & it touched real-github #22136

Closed

liangchenye mentioned this pull request Feb 29, 2016

e2e flake: Jenkins failing with firewall rule issues #18738

Closed

k8s-github-robot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 29, 2016

Merge pull request #20415 from liangchenye/e2etest

89038f3

Auto commit by PR queue bot

k8s-github-robot merged commit 89038f3 into kubernetes:master Feb 29, 2016

aronchick mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2016

Automate Docker Validation Process kubernetes/enhancements#57

Closed

16 tasks

E2etest container conformance test #20415

E2etest container conformance test #20415

Conversation

liangchenye commented Feb 1, 2016

googlebot commented Feb 1, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 1, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 1, 2016

k8s-github-robot commented Feb 1, 2016

liangchenye commented Feb 1, 2016

googlebot commented Feb 1, 2016

liangchenye commented Feb 1, 2016

pwittrock commented Feb 3, 2016

yifan-gu commented Feb 3, 2016

kevin-wangzefeng commented Feb 3, 2016

feiskyer commented Feb 3, 2016

pwittrock Feb 3, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pwittrock Feb 3, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liangchenye Feb 4, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liangchenye commented Feb 4, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 4, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 4, 2016

k8s-github-robot commented Feb 4, 2016

pwittrock commented Feb 26, 2016

pwittrock commented Feb 26, 2016

pwittrock commented Feb 26, 2016

k8s-github-robot commented Feb 27, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 27, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 27, 2016

justinsb commented Feb 27, 2016

justinsb commented Feb 28, 2016

liangchenye commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 29, 2016

liangchenye commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 29, 2016

Random-Liu commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 29, 2016

Random-Liu commented Feb 29, 2016

liangchenye commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-github-robot commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-bot commented Feb 29, 2016

k8s-github-robot commented Feb 29, 2016