Skip to content

Re-enable ContainerMissing testing. #1264

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
google-prow-robot merged 1 commit into from
Jun 19, 2018
Merged

Re-enable ContainerMissing testing. #1264

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 7 additions & 7 deletions test/e2e/errorcondition_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ import (
"github.com/google/go-containerregistry/v1/remote"
"github.com/knative/serving/pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1"
"github.com/knative/serving/test"
corev1 "k8s.io/api/core/v1"
metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1"
"strings"
"testing"
Expand All @@ -37,7 +38,6 @@ const (
// https://github.com/knative/serving/blob/master/docs/spec/errors.md
// for the container image missing scenario.
func TestContainerErrorMsg(t *testing.T) {
t.Skip("Skipping until https://github.com/knative/serving/issues/1240 is closed")
clients := Setup(t)

// Specify an invalid image path
Expand All @@ -58,12 +58,12 @@ func TestContainerErrorMsg(t *testing.T) {
// Checking for "Container image not present in repository" scenario defined in error condition spec
err = test.WaitForConfigurationState(clients.Configs, names.Config, func(r *v1alpha1.Configuration) (bool, error) {
cond := r.Status.GetCondition(v1alpha1.ConfigurationConditionLatestRevisionReady)
if cond != nil {
if cond.Reason == containerMissing && strings.HasPrefix(cond.Message, manifestUnknown) && cond.Status == "False" {
if cond != nil && cond.Status != corev1.ConditionUnknown {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@jessiezcc jessiezcc Jun 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should we still check for Reason=="RevisionFailed" to replace ContainerMissing?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@mattmoor mattmoor Jun 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we need to.

if strings.Contains(cond.Message, manifestUnknown) && cond.Status == corev1.ConditionFalse {
return true, nil
}
s := fmt.Sprintf("The configuration %s was not marked with expected error condition (Reason=\"%s\", Message=\"%s\", Status=\"%s\"), but with (Reason=\"%s\", Message=\"%s\", Status=\"%s\")", names.Config, containerMissing, manifestUnknown, "False", cond.Reason, cond.Message, cond.Status)
return true, errors.New(s)
return true, fmt.Errorf("The configuration %s was not marked with expected error condition (Reason=%q, Message=%q, Status=%q), but with (Reason=%q, Message=%q, Status=%q)",
names.Config, containerMissing, manifestUnknown, "False", cond.Reason, cond.Message, cond.Status)
}
return false, nil
})
Expand All @@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ func TestContainerErrorMsg(t *testing.T) {
if cond.Reason == containerMissing && strings.HasPrefix(cond.Message, manifestUnknown) {
return true, nil
}
s := fmt.Sprintf("The revision %s was not marked with expected error condition (Reason=\"%s\", Message=\"%s\"), but with (Reason=\"%s\", Message=\"%s\")", revisionName, containerMissing, manifestUnknown, cond.Reason, cond.Message)
return true, errors.New(s)
return true, fmt.Errorf("The revision %s was not marked with expected error condition (Reason=%q, Message=%q), but with (Reason=%q, Message=%q)",
revisionName, containerMissing, manifestUnknown, cond.Reason, cond.Message)
}
return false, nil
})
Expand Down