Skip to content
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

OCPBUGS-15576: fix: ensure panic safety in PVC controller for non set storageClassName #369

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2023

Conversation

jakobmoellerdev
Copy link
Contributor

Otherwise if a PVC is created without storageClassName, LVM Operator will crash and cause a panic.

Also removes unnecessary API Reader in PVC controller and cleans up logging, introduces test cases for ignore cases

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@jakobmoellerdev: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.14.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

In response to this:

Otherwise if a PVC is created without storageClassName, LVM Operator will crash and cause a panic.

Also removes unnecessary API Reader in PVC controller and cleans up logging, introduces test cases for ignore cases

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.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 26, 2023

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 26, 2023
@jakobmoellerdev
Copy link
Contributor Author

/jira refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@jakobmoellerdev: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.14.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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.

@jakobmoellerdev
Copy link
Contributor Author

/jira refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@jakobmoellerdev: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.14.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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.

@qJkee
Copy link
Contributor

qJkee commented Jul 26, 2023

/jira refresh

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed jira/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@qJkee: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.14.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.14.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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.

@jakobmoellerdev jakobmoellerdev marked this pull request as ready for review July 26, 2023 10:51
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from jerpeter1 and qJkee July 26, 2023 10:51
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #369 (eda99c3) into main (f444ae9) will increase coverage by 2.16%.
Report is 9 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 80.00%.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #369      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   14.38%   16.55%   +2.16%     
==========================================
  Files          23       24       +1     
  Lines        1932     2060     +128     
==========================================
+ Hits          278      341      +63     
- Misses       1630     1693      +63     
- Partials       24       26       +2     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
controllers/persistent-volume-claim/controller.go 39.70% <80.00%> (ø)

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🥲

@jeff-roche
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 26, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jakobmoellerdev, jeff-roche

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:

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 26, 2023
@jeff-roche
Copy link
Contributor

/hold for one more review
/cc @brandisher @qJkee

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from brandisher July 26, 2023 11:31
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 26, 2023
@jakobmoellerdev jakobmoellerdev force-pushed the OCPBUGS-15576 branch 3 times, most recently from d30d1bf to 5f3feee Compare July 26, 2023 15:18
@qJkee
Copy link
Contributor

qJkee commented Jul 26, 2023

/lgtm
/unhold

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 26, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD e0ccb5c and 2 for PR HEAD 798630d in total

@jakobmoellerdev
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jeff-roche e2e test is still flaky right? Should we wait for them to be fixed or do you want to force this merge in?

@jeff-roche
Copy link
Contributor

@jeff-roche e2e test is still flaky right? Should we wait for them to be fixed or do you want to force this merge in?

I will run the e2e tests manually and report back

Also removes unnecessary API Reader and cleans up logging, introduces test cases for ignore cases
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 27, 2023
@jeff-roche
Copy link
Contributor

Manually tested
/override ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 27, 2023

@jeff-roche: Overrode contexts on behalf of jeff-roche: ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

In response to this:

Manually tested
/override ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

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.

@qJkee
Copy link
Contributor

qJkee commented Jul 27, 2023

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 27, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD e0ccb5c and 2 for PR HEAD deac46e in total

@jeff-roche
Copy link
Contributor

Manually tested
/override ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 27, 2023

@jeff-roche: Overrode contexts on behalf of jeff-roche: ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

In response to this:

Manually tested
/override ci/prow/lvm-operator-bundle-e2e-aws

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.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jul 27, 2023

@jakobmoellerdev: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 255d754 into openshift:main Jul 27, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@jakobmoellerdev: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-15576 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Otherwise if a PVC is created without storageClassName, LVM Operator will crash and cause a panic.

Also removes unnecessary API Reader in PVC controller and cleans up logging, introduces test cases for ignore cases

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants