-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40.1k
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
A few changes to federated-service e2e test. #27972
Conversation
The DNS changes here are just code readability changes and no functional change, right @mml ? |
and debug logs, but no functionality. |
Expect(clSvc.Name).To(Equal(service.Name)) | ||
// Some fields are expected to be different, so make them the same before checking equality. | ||
clSvc.Spec.ClusterIP = service.Spec.ClusterIP | ||
clSvc.Spec.ExternalIPs = service.Spec.ExternalIPs | ||
clSvc.Spec.DeprecatedPublicIPs = service.Spec.DeprecatedPublicIPs | ||
clSvc.Spec.LoadBalancerIP = service.Spec.LoadBalancerIP | ||
clSvc.Spec.LoadBalancerSourceRanges = service.Spec.LoadBalancerSourceRanges | ||
for i := range clSvc.Spec.Ports { |
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.
minor nit: Prefer "for i, port := ....". Then you can just use "port.NodePort below.
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.
That actually doesn't work, as port is a value type and ends up being a copy of the object and your changes get lost.
I'll add a comment explaining this, as I banged my head against it for quite awhile.
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.
Doh! Of course you're right :-)
Thanks @mml. Only nits, which can be addressed in a followup PR if you prefer. |
PS: Feel free to remove the LGTM label to avoid auto-merge if you prefer to address the nits in this PR. |
bb0fafa
to
c33d929
Compare
I managed to drop some changes during my git antics, but I think it is in good shape now. |
if _, ok := kd.federations[path[2]]; ok { | ||
return true | ||
if len(path) != 4+len(kd.domainPath) { | ||
glog.Infof("len(%q) != 4+len(%q)", path, kd.domainPath) |
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.
It might be better to move these glog.Infos to glog.V(2).Info.
Most of the changes that get the test to pass have been made already or elsewhere. Here we restructure a bit fixing a nesting problem, extend the timeouts, and start creating distinct backend pods that I'll delete in the non-local test (coming shortly). Also some extra debugging info in the DNS code. I made some upstream changes to skydns in skynetservices/skydns#283
"Jenkins GKE Smoke Test" is something I've not seen before. It seems to be borked. @lavalamp ? @k8s-bot test this issue: #IGNORE
|
GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e2021ef. |
@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge] |
GCE e2e build/test passed for commit e2021ef. |
Automatic merge from submit-queue |
Most of the changes that get the test to pass have been made already or
elsewhere. Here we restructure a bit fixing a nesting problem, extend the
timeouts, and start creating distinct backend pods that I'll delete in the
non-local test (coming shortly).
Also some extra debugging info in the DNS code. I made some upstream
changes to skydns in skynetservices/skydns#283
For #27739
Includes a commit from @madhusudancs that I will remove once his merges.