Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
NO-ISSUE: Remove remaining webhook tests from serial - #520
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
commented
Oct 13, 2025
@perdasilva: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue. DetailsIn response to this: 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: perdasilva The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
b4475b9 to
bc138adComparetmshort
commented
Oct 13, 2025
/hold |
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| "name": "[sig-olmv1][OCPFeatureGate:NewOLMWebhookProviderOpenshiftServiceCA] OLMv1 operator with webhooks should have a working mutating webhook [Serial]", | ||
| "name": "[sig-olmv1][OCPFeatureGate:NewOLMWebhookProviderOpenshiftServiceCA] OLMv1 operator with webhooks should have a working mutating webhook", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/hold
Those tests were created as SERIAL because all tests were using the same sample.
Therefore, they could not run in parallel.
Now, if we want to move away from SERIAL we must:
- Rename as done
- Then, ensure that they are not serial see
Ordered, Serial, func() {<- It must be changed - Ensure that each test will create a sample with a unique name ( bundle, CE and all that is used by each test must be unique )
- Ensure that it works fine and will not cause flakes by testing with payload-aggregation 10 times.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm pretty sure with Todd's changes we are generating unique images now, so no serial should work. I'll start the aggregate jobs. If those pass please unblock and merge.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we are using unqiue names then:
We still needing to change Ordered, Serial, func() { <- That is what make the test run as serial
See;
The TAG [SERIAL] is valid for OCP CI ecosystem only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Weird - maybe these have different meanings then because now the tests run in the periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.20-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6-techpreview job... I'll remove them though
@perdasilva: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
perdasilva
commented
Oct 13, 2025
/payload-aggregate periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.20-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6-techpreview 10 |
@perdasilva: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/39cb2850-a879-11f0-8afe-24e1601928fb-0 |
kuiwang02
commented
Oct 14, 2025
currently these are four webhook cases: we could research and verify if they are running in parallel without any conflicts. I will try it soon. /hold but for 4), it could be parallel even we found way to make webhook case in parallel because it is deletion operation. |
Signed-off-by: Per Goncalves da Silva <pegoncal@redhat.com>
bc138ad to
41f798cCompareNew changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
perdasilva
commented
Oct 14, 2025
/payload-aggregate periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.20-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6-techpreview 10 |
@perdasilva: trigger 1 job(s) for the /payload-(with-prs|job|aggregate|job-with-prs|aggregate-with-prs) command
See details on https://pr-payload-tests.ci.openshift.org/runs/ci/a59c4030-a8d0-11f0-810e-0ecd61737c15-0 |
In the current state only the validating webhook test was not in the [Serial] OTE profile. This PR updates the remaining specs out of serial.