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-43777: apiserver: add tests to verify kube-apiserver is accessible via different endpoints #29339

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vrutkovs
Copy link
Member

@vrutkovs vrutkovs commented Dec 3, 2024

Add tests which check that kube-apiserver is reachable via service network, external and internal api endpoints

TODO:

  • Fix kube-apiserver should be accessible via service network endpoint failing in pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Dec 3, 2024
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vrutkovs: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-43777, which is valid.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target version (4.19.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.19.0)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @wangke19

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

In response to this:

Add tests which check that kube-apiserver is reachable via service network, external and internal api endpoints

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.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Jira bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 3, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from wangke19, c3d and sjenning December 3, 2024 13:40
@vrutkovs vrutkovs force-pushed the access-kube-apiserver branch from 24188fa to 6252a14 Compare December 3, 2024 14:22
@vrutkovs vrutkovs changed the title OCPBUGS-43777: apiserver: add tests to verify login via various methods OCPBUGS-43777: apiserver: add tests to verify kube-apiserver is accessible via different endpoints Dec 4, 2024
@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

vrutkovs commented Dec 4, 2024

/retest

Copy link

openshift-trt bot commented Dec 4, 2024

Job Failure Risk Analysis for sha: 6252a14

Job Name Failure Risk
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-kube-apiserver-rollout IncompleteTests
Tests for this run (103) are below the historical average (1373): IncompleteTests (not enough tests ran to make a reasonable risk analysis; this could be due to infra, installation, or upgrade problems)
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 IncompleteTests
Tests for this run (103) are below the historical average (2601): IncompleteTests (not enough tests ran to make a reasonable risk analysis; this could be due to infra, installation, or upgrade problems)
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn IncompleteTests
Tests for this run (103) are below the historical average (2397): IncompleteTests (not enough tests ran to make a reasonable risk analysis; this could be due to infra, installation, or upgrade problems)
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-upgrade IncompleteTests
Tests for this run (102) are below the historical average (2746): IncompleteTests (not enough tests ran to make a reasonable risk analysis; this could be due to infra, installation, or upgrade problems)

Comment on lines 50 to 52
} else {
apiPath = strings.Replace(externalAPIUrl.Host, "api.", "api-int.", 1)
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is api-int.* always going to resolve to the internal API server endpoint?

Would pulling the internal API server URL using infra.Status.APIServerInternalURL be more reflective of the flow that a user/client may attempt to take if they were to look at the Infrastructure API?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, good point. iiuc Hypershift may use a different URL for internal URL

Copy link
Member Author

@vrutkovs vrutkovs Dec 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed in e1fd7a8

@vrutkovs vrutkovs force-pushed the access-kube-apiserver branch from 6252a14 to e1fd7a8 Compare December 5, 2024 08:18
Copy link

openshift-trt bot commented Dec 5, 2024

Job Failure Risk Analysis for sha: e1fd7a8

Job Name Failure Risk
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-aws-ovn-serial Medium
[bz-kube-apiserver][invariant] alert/KubeAPIErrorBudgetBurn should not be at or above info
This test has passed 97.73% of 44 runs on jobs ['periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-serial' 'periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.19-e2e-aws-ovn-serial'] in the last 14 days.

Open Bugs
alert/KubeAPIErrorBudgetBurn should not be at or above info
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-upgrade Low
[sig-node] static pods should start after being created
This test has passed 70.73% of 164 runs on release 4.19 [Architecture:amd64 FeatureSet:default Installer:ipi Network:ovn NetworkStack:ipv4 Platform:aws SecurityMode:default Topology:single Upgrade:micro] in the last week.

Open Bugs
Static pod controller pods sometimes fail to start [etcd]
---
[sig-node] static pods should start after being created
This test has passed 70.73% of 164 runs on release 4.19 [Architecture:amd64 FeatureSet:default Installer:ipi Network:ovn NetworkStack:ipv4 Platform:aws SecurityMode:default Topology:single Upgrade:micro] in the last week.

Open Bugs
Static pod controller pods sometimes fail to start [etcd]

@vrutkovs vrutkovs force-pushed the access-kube-apiserver branch from e1fd7a8 to c030cf7 Compare December 5, 2024 12:40
Copy link

openshift-trt bot commented Dec 5, 2024

Job Failure Risk Analysis for sha: c030cf7

Job Name Failure Risk
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-upgrade Low
[sig-node] static pods should start after being created
This test has passed 71.07% of 159 runs on release 4.19 [Architecture:amd64 FeatureSet:default Installer:ipi Network:ovn NetworkStack:ipv4 Platform:aws SecurityMode:default Topology:single Upgrade:micro] in the last week.

Open Bugs
Static pod controller pods sometimes fail to start [etcd]
---
[sig-node] static pods should start after being created
This test has passed 71.07% of 159 runs on release 4.19 [Architecture:amd64 FeatureSet:default Installer:ipi Network:ovn NetworkStack:ipv4 Platform:aws SecurityMode:default Topology:single Upgrade:micro] in the last week.

Open Bugs
Static pod controller pods sometimes fail to start [etcd]

Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes look reasonable to me.

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 5, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 5, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven, vrutkovs
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign dennisperiquet for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

Add tests which check that kube-apiserver is reachable via service
network, external and internal api endpoints
@vrutkovs vrutkovs force-pushed the access-kube-apiserver branch from c030cf7 to 587d445 Compare December 6, 2024 11:00
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 6, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 6, 2024

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 6, 2024

@vrutkovs: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-upgrade 587d445 link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-single-node-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn 587d445 link false /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-agnostic-ovn-cmd 587d445 link false /test e2e-agnostic-ovn-cmd
ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-kube-apiserver-rollout 587d445 link false /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-kube-apiserver-rollout
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-kube-apiserver-rollout 587d445 link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-kube-apiserver-rollout
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 587d445 link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 587d445 link true /test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Copy link

openshift-trt bot commented Dec 6, 2024

Job Failure Risk Analysis for sha: 587d445

Job Name Failure Risk
pull-ci-openshift-origin-master-okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn IncompleteTests
Tests for this run (20) are below the historical average (2329): IncompleteTests (not enough tests ran to make a reasonable risk analysis; this could be due to infra, installation, or upgrade problems)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants