[IUO] Add jira ref cnv-75721 bug #3318
Open
+17
−5
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Harel Meir <[email protected]>
WalkthroughThis pull request introduces a session-scoped pytest fixture Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
🧰 Additional context used🧠 Learnings (20)📓 Common learnings📚 Learning: 2025-12-15T12:33:06.686ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-12-22T16:27:40.244ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2026-01-04T19:37:57.919ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-06-18T09:21:34.315ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-19T08:13:30.263ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-10T23:16:25.845ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-08T21:34:28.924ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-08-27T08:34:49.132ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-05-28T10:50:56.122ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-08-09T01:46:48.039ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-06-17T07:45:37.776ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-29T20:33:51.007ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-09T11:51:37.860ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-11-19T17:00:58.250ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-10-16T12:47:04.521ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-10-27T15:30:06.412ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-08-20T23:57:48.380ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-12T08:10:48.874ZApplied to files:
📚 Learning: 2025-09-29T19:05:24.987ZApplied to files:
🧬 Code graph analysis (4)tests/install_upgrade_operators/conftest.py (1)
tests/install_upgrade_operators/deployment/test_hco_deployment_params.py (1)
tests/install_upgrade_operators/deployment/conftest.py (1)
tests/install_upgrade_operators/pod_validation/test_pod_spec.py (1)
🪛 Ruff (0.14.10)tests/install_upgrade_operators/deployment/test_hco_deployment_params.py72-72: Unused function argument: (ARG001) tests/install_upgrade_operators/pod_validation/test_pod_spec.py51-51: Unused function argument: (ARG001) ⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (9)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Contributor
|
Report bugs in Issues Welcome! 🎉This pull request will be automatically processed with the following features: 🔄 Automatic Actions
📋 Available CommandsPR Status Management
Review & Approval
Testing & Validation
Container Operations
Cherry-pick Operations
Label Management
✅ Merge RequirementsThis PR will be automatically approved when the following conditions are met:
📊 Review ProcessApprovers and ReviewersApprovers:
Reviewers:
Available Labels
💡 Tips
For more information, please refer to the project documentation or contact the maintainers. |
openshift-virtualization-qe-bot-2
requested review from
OhadRevah,
albarker-rh,
dshchedr,
rnetser and
vsibirsk
openshift-virtualization-qe-bot
added
tox:verify-tc-requirement-polarion:running
openshift-virtualization-qe-bot
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
/verified tested: tests/install_upgrade_operators/deployment/test_hco_deployment_params.py tests/install_upgrade_operators/pod_validation/test_pod_spec.py |
Contributor
Test execution plan request detailsCRITICAL: You MUST post an inline review comment on the first changed line of the first file. As an expert software testing engineer, analyze all modified files in this PR and create a targeted test execution plan. Analysis Requirements:
Your deliverable: Test Execution Plan
Guidelines:
CRITICAL WORKFLOW COMPLETION RULES: When responding to this test execution plan request, you MUST follow these rules EXACTLY:
ABSOLUTE PROHIBITIONS (violating these creates empty/meaningless reviews):
Remember: The pull request review is visible to users. Additional comments are redundant noise. CRITICAL: Before setting "Run smoke tests: True", you MUST use shell scripts to: |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
Tip For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes. 🧩 Analysis chain🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 8283 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 873 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 2456 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 272 🏁 Script executed: Length of output: 1728 🧠 Learnings used |
RoniKishner
reviewed
Jan 5, 2026
| @pytest.fixture() | ||
| def xfail_if_jira_75721_open(cnv_deployment_by_name): | ||
| if cnv_deployment_by_name.name == KUBEVIRT_MIGRATION_CONTROLLER and is_jira_open(jira_id="CNV-75721"): | ||
| def xfail_if_jira_75721_open_and_migration_controller_deployment(jira_75721_open, cnv_deployment_by_name): |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm trying to understand why you need 1 function for the deployment, and another one for the pod ?
Usually if there is no pod, then the deployment isn't working, which is why it is enough to check 1 of them.
I looked at JIRA 75721, and currently it is lacking in information, can you explain it here, and add some info in the JIRA ?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@RoniKishner
Each cnv pod should have priorityclass set, which comes from deployents
Usually if its set on the deployment, it should propogate to pods aswell
But throretically if the propogation fails due to high load/fail pod image updates may
So 2 functions are required since its 2 different tests, and the naming convention is different(deployment is exact name, pod have this sha additional chars)
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
propagation from deployment to pod is a k8s responsbility; why is it tested?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess because its not 1:1
We have cnv-pods coming from d/s, like bridge-marker, virt-handler...
I guess it can be optimized to check only the pod, but can it be done in a follow up PR?
It will require some adjustments
Contributor
|
/lgtm |
RoniKishner
approved these changes
Jan 6, 2026
Contributor
RoniKishner
left a comment
RoniKishner
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add more information on https://issues.redhat.com/browse/CNV-75721.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
9 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Short description:
Bug affect pods aswell
More details:
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for reviewer:
jira-ticket:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Note: This release includes internal testing infrastructure improvements with no user-facing changes.
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.