USHIFT-3788: Workload partitioning RF tests #3700
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
| FOR ${pod} IN @{json_status} | ||
| ${pod_info}= Catenate SEPARATOR= | ||
| ... container: ${pod}[info][runtimeSpec][annotations][io.kubernetes.pod.name] | ||
| ... ${EMPTY} pod: ${pod}[status][metadata][name] | ||
| ... ${EMPTY} pid: ${pod}[info][pid] | ||
| ... ${EMPTY} namespace: ${pod}[info][runtimeSpec][annotations][io.kubernetes.pod.namespace] | ||
|
|
||
| IF ${pod}[info][runtimeSpec][linux][resources][cpu][cpus] != ${cpus} | ||
| Fail ${pod_info} | ||
| END |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wondering what the jq version of this would look like. TIL this syntax
eslutsky
changed the title
|
@eslutsky: This pull request references USHIFT-3788 which is a valid jira issue. Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set. In 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. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
jira/valid-reference
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
9 times, most recently
from
c49bcc4
to
5236554
Compare
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
9 times, most recently
from
91fd52e
to
01706e4
Compare
openshift-merge-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
|
|
||
| Cleanup And Create NS | ||
| [Documentation] cleanup microshift and recreate the namespace for workloads | ||
| Cleanup MicroShift --all --keep-images |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Keep in mind this line will eliminate /var/lib/microshift, meaning the kubeconfig in use is also gone and new certs are generated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we have some other way to remove all the running containers ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is ok :) what I mean is that you need to setup kubeconfig again after doing a cleanup to have things under control.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, thats handled in Restart MicroShift keyword
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
from
01706e4
to
8569c11
Compare
openshift-merge-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7f541e2
to
eae4e96
Compare
|
/lgtm |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
| Configure Kubelet For Workload Partitioning ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} | ||
| Configure CRIO For Workload Partitioning ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} | ||
| Configure CPUAffinity In Systemd ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} ${SYSTEMD_CRIO_DROPIN} | ||
| Configure CPUAffinity In Systemd ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} ${SYSTEMD_MICROSHIFT_DROPIN} | ||
| Configure CPUAffinity In Systemd ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} ${SYSTEMD_OVS_DROPIN} | ||
| Configure CPUAffinity In Systemd ${MANAGEMENT_CPU} ${SYSTEMD_OVSDB_DROPIN} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you think about doing all this in a blueprint? So when the system is up then everything is already configured?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, it makes sense , but i will have to change the reservedSystemCPUs: 0-1 in your blueprint to reservedSystemCPUs: 0 , since this test dont work very well with range of CPUs 0-1, wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we agreed off line that we can do this optimization later
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
from
eae4e96
to
c8051b4
Compare
| Resource ../../resources/microshift-process.resource | ||
| Resource ../../resources/microshift-network.resource | ||
|
|
||
| Suite Setup Setup Suite With Namespace |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like previous test (tuned) does not wait for MicroShift readiness right after rebooting in the teardown. This can make this test run too fast and MicroShift is not available yet.
https://gcsweb-ci.apps.ci.l2s4.p1.openshiftapps.com/gcs/test-platform-results/pr-logs/pull/openshift_microshift/3700/pull-ci-openshift-microshift-main-microshift-metal-tests/1821188298421309440/artifacts/microshift-metal-tests/openshift-microshift-e2e-metal-tests/artifacts/scenario-info/el94-src@low-latency/log.html
Tuned teardown: Start / End / Elapsed: 20240807 17:13:21.895 / 20240807 17:13:58.041 / 00:00:36.146
workload partitioning setup trying to create a namespace: Start / End / Elapsed: 20240807 17:13:59.543 / 20240807 17:13:59.652 / 00:00:00.109
This failed because MicroShift is not up yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, we already fixed that in the other PR, cherry picking the change.
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
from
c8051b4
to
20064a3
Compare
Signed-off-by: Evgeny Slutsky <eslutsky@redhat.com>
eslutsky
force-pushed
the
WorkloadPartitioning_tests
branch
from
20064a3
to
573eac9
Compare
|
/unhold |
openshift-ci
bot
added
lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: eslutsky, pacevedom 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 |
|
@eslutsky: 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Which issue(s) this PR addresses:
Closes #