Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Kubeadm Networking Configuration E2E Tests #80259
Kubeadm Networking Configuration E2E Tests #80259
Changes from all commits
ca3bdfd
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This test is checking kubeadm behaviour indirectly, and I'm wondering if instead we should test the kubeadm bit more specifically
Kubeadm only responsibility for networking is to pass the settings to the control plane components (in this case, to translate
podSubnet
intocluster-cidr
,allocate-node-cidrs
andnode-cidr-mask-size
flags for the controller manager)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you have in mind?
I followed this approach based on what I saw in other tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for not being clear.
I think we should have a test that checks kubeadm assigns the expected value to cluster-cidr, allocate-node-cidrs and node-cidr-mask-size (in addition or in replacement to the current test)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fabriziopandini
allocate-node-cidrs
is internal to controller-manager and is not exposed, so I don't see any way to verify that.node-cidr-mask-size
is calcuated by kubeadm (see func calcNodeCidrSize). There are some issues with verifying it:node-cidr-mask-size
will actually become a slice.node-cidr-mask-size
is not written to kubeadm config, so we'll have to duplicate this func in the e2e tests in order to verify it.Because of these reasons, I would prefer not to add e2e tests for this. Perhaps when dual-stack changes land, we can revisit this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I got your point and I don't want to block on this.
However, I think this test is useful and doable reading the args in the controller-manager pod, so please add an item on the umbrella issue: "implement a test that checks kubeadm assigns the expected value to cluster-cidr, allocate-node-cidrs and node-cidr-mask-size (in addition or in replacement to the current test"