Other tests that check for default storageclass also
check for cloudprovider such as gce, aws and openstack
and hence are already skipped in bare metal environments.
But this particular test keeps failing because no such check exists.
Not all users of the E2E framework want to run cloud-provider specific
tests. By splitting out the code it becomes possible to decide in
a E2E test suite which providers are supported.
This is achieved in two ways:
- the framework calls certain functions through a provider
interface instead of calling specific cloud provider functions
directly
- tests that are cloud-provider specific directly import the
new provider packages
The ingress test utilities are only needed by a few tests. Splitting
them out into a separate package makes the framework simpler for test
suites not using those tests.
Fixes: #66649
Refactoring for non-csi e2e test similar to below commit in csi e2e test.
4d11dab272 (diff-0d9ecaa3e6a0297186ad33f57aad472e)
Scopes for this refactoring are below four files:
- test/e2e/storage/volumes.go
- test/e2e/storage/volume_io.go
- test/e2e/storage/persistent_volumes-volumemode.go
- test/e2e/storage/subpath.go
fixes: #66571
This set of e2e tests is to confirm that persistent volume works well for all volumeModes.
Coverage of the tests are shown in the figure of [Test cases], below.
Once implementation policy is confirmed to be good, we can add plugins and test cases to this.
[Test cases]
# plugin volumeMode Test case Expectation
--- ---------- -------------- ------------------------------------------------------ ------------
1 iSCSI Block (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
2 iSCSI FileSystem (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
3 RBD Block (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
4 RBD FileSystem (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
5 CephFS Block (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Fail
6 CephFS FileSystem (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
7 NFS Block (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Fail
8 NFS FileSystem (a) Create Pod with PV and confirm Read/Write to PV Success
fixes: #56803
- Add PodStartShortTimeout and ClaimProvisionShortTimeout constants.
- Change framework.PodStartTimeout to framework.PodStartShortTimeout in
persistent_volumes-local.go. Busybox image is very small, no need to
wait for a long time.
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.
Volume deletion should be idempotent
- Describe* calls should return `aws.Error` so caller can handle individual errors. `aws.Error` already has enough context (`"InvalidVolume.NotFound: The volume 'vol-0a06cc096e989c5a2' does not exist"`)
- Deletion of already deleted volume should succeed.
**Release note**:
Fixes: #60778
```release-note
NONE
```
/sig storage
/sig aws
/assign @justinsb @gnufied
VolumeMode block requires alpha feature-gate BlockVolume=true
Added VolumeMode to e2e test framework for pv and pvc
Added volumeDevices to e2e test framework for block volumes
utils/image/manifest has an additional `arch` parameter, which determines
whether an image ends in `-$ARCH` (like `-amd64`).
All locations that previously had gcr.io urls referenced in costants or inline
have been updated to refere test/utils/image.
Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 46972, 42829, 46799, 46802, 46844)
Multizone static pv test
**What this PR does / why we need it**:
Adds an e2e test for checking that pods get scheduled to the same zone as statically created PVs. This tests the PersistentVolumeLabel admission controller, which adds zone and region labels when PVs are created. As part of this, I also had to make changes to volume test utility code to pass in a zone parameter for creating PDs, and also had to add an argument to the e2e test program to accept a list of zones.
Fixes#46995
**Special notes for your reviewer**:
It's probably easier to review each commit separately.
**Release note**:
NONE
