Old release branch test cleaning #18509
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
cncf-cla: yes
k8s-ci-robot
added
area/config
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
from
9a8cea5 to
3784efa
Compare
|
/retest |
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7c52545 to
4f3d3c2
Compare
|
/assign @dims |
|
@BenTheElder curious if you think I broek anything for Kind |
|
/approve |
|
thanks for doing this @tpepper |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/assign @BenTheElder |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
from
4f3d3c2 to
13afa45
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
needs-rebase
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
from
13afa45 to
1e6f456
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
| - --repo=k8s.io/kubernetes=release-1.15 | ||
| - --repo=github.com/containerd/cri=release/1.2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does cri 1.2 not work with later releases of kubernetes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might make sense to keep if there is somebody curating it. Perhaps it is a naive sign of me seeing a test of this odd combination (which mostly passes) and then jumping to an assumption of non-value. There might be value in a test called "containerd-node-conformance" if that is testing a meaningful variation. I don't understand what is this "1.2" thing though as there's no such tag on containerd/cri although it is a branch, which hasn't seen commits since January. There's a 1.3 branch active to March. And a 1.11 branch active through last year. Guess this isn't semver.
I would propose these old variations be dropped and an issue opened for a test plan of containerd variations. Based on curl http://storage.googleapis.com/k8s-metrics/failures-latest.json | grep -A1 containerd | grep -v ^--, it seems there's a gap in curation on things containerd:
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gce-stackdriver": {
"failing_days": 889
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-sd-logging": {
"failing_days": 856
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-sd-logging-k8s-resources": {
"failing_days": 847
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-statefulset": {
"failing_days": 808
"ci-cri-containerd-node-e2e-serial": {
"failing_days": 760
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-es-logging": {
"failing_days": 651
"ci-cri-containerd-node-e2e-flaky": {
"failing_days": 426
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-windows-containerd-gce": {
"failing_days": 235
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-containerd-gce-netd-calico": {
"failing_days": 232
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-containerd-gce-netd": {
"failing_days": 232
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-ubuntu-gce": {
"failing_days": 177
"ci-containerd-e2e-ubuntu-gce": {
"failing_days": 177
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-windows-containerd-gce-1-18": {
"failing_days": 164
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-flaky": {
"failing_days": 153
"ci-cri-containerd-e2e-gci-gce-alpha-features": {
"failing_days": 126
"ci-containerd-soak-gci-gce": {
"failing_days": 125
"pr:pull-cri-containerd-windows-cri": {
"failing_days": 119
"ci-cri-containerd-node-e2e-benchmark": {
"failing_days": 119
"ci-cri-containerd-cri-validation-windows": {
"failing_days": 119
"ci-containerd-node-e2e-features-1-2": {
"failing_days": 119
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-aks-engine-azure-master-windows-containerd-hyperv": {
"failing_days": 87
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-aks-engine-azure-master-windows-containerd-hyperv-serial-slow": {
"failing_days": 87
"ci-containerd-node-e2e-features-1-3": {
"failing_days": 60
"ci-containerd-node-e2e-1-3": {
"failing_days": 60
"ci-containerd-node-e2e-1-2": {
"failing_days": 60
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-gci-gce-scalability-containerd-correctness": {
"failing_days": 44
"ci-kubernetes-e2e-aks-engine-master-windows-containerd-azuredisk-csi-driver": {
"failing_days": 31
Despite that some of the boards at https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-node-containerd do have a lot of green. It's not clear much of that green is relevant...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
aaand you already did #18570 thanks
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
from
1e6f456 to
456e94f
Compare
These are a set of old tests which have been failing for a long time and are against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These are a set of old tests which have been failing for a long time and are against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These are a set of old tests which have been failing for a long time and are against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These are against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These are a set of old tests which in many cases have been failing for a long time and are against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
There is no longer CI on release-1.15 so it doesn't need skipped. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These is an against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
These is an against an old enough codebase to be irrelevant for the upstream community. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
There is no longer activity on these branches. Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper <tpepper@vmware.com>
tpepper
force-pushed
the
old_release_branch_test_cleaning
branch
from
456e94f to
8b8ea59
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: dims, spiffxp, tpepper 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 |
|
@tpepper: Updated the
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 kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
Sorry for not noticing earlier, but with Gardener we actually
I understand the cleanup intent, but feel this is a bit overdone as the actively reported tests do have a certain value for our customers. |
Following today's SIG Testing meeting on cleaning up test noise I was looking at some items in http://storage.googleapis.com/k8s-metrics/failures-latest.json and adjacent test configs. The PR is an attempt to start cleaning out things that were at most relevant back at times when we were dealing with releases which are no longer community supported. This obscures current work.
Signed-off-by: Tim Pepper tpepper@vmware.com