Added unit tests and e2e for InstallPlan

Signed-off-by: Jason Zhang <jaszhang@redhat.com>

controllers/operatorpolicy_status.go

@@ -1253,7 +1253,10 @@ func catalogSourceObj(
 	}
 
 	if isMissing {
-		compliance = string(policyv1.NonCompliant)
+		if complianceConfig != "Compliant" {
+			compliance = string(policyv1.NonCompliant)
+		}
+
 		reason = reasonWantFoundDNE
 	}
 

controllers/operatorpolicy_status_test.go

@@ -7,103 +7,11 @@ import (
 	"github.com/stretchr/testify/assert"
 	appsv1 "k8s.io/api/apps/v1"
 	metav1 "k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/apis/meta/v1"
-	"k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/runtime"
 
 	policyv1beta1 "open-cluster-management.io/config-policy-controller/api/v1beta1"
 )
 
-func TestCalculateComplianceConditionComplianceConfig(t *testing.T) {
-	t.Parallel()
-
-	testPolicy := &policyv1beta1.OperatorPolicy{
-		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
-			Name:      "test-policy",
-			Namespace: "default",
-		},
-		Spec: policyv1beta1.OperatorPolicySpec{
-			Severity:          "low",
-			RemediationAction: "enforce",
-			ComplianceType:    "musthave",
-			Subscription: runtime.RawExtension{
-				Raw: []byte(`{
-					"source": "my-catalog",
-					"sourceNamespace": "my-ns",
-					"name": "my-operator",
-					"channel": "stable",
-					"startingCSV": "my-operator-v1"
-				}`),
-			},
-			ComplianceConfig: policyv1beta1.ComplianceConfig{
-				CatalogSourceUnhealthy: "NonCompliant",
-				DeploymentsUnavailable: "NonCompliant",
-				UpgradesAvailable:      "NonCompliant",
-			},
-		},
-		Status: policyv1beta1.OperatorPolicyStatus{
-			Conditions: []metav1.Condition{
-				{
-					Type:   "ValidPolicySpec",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "OperatorGroupCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "SubscriptionCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "InstallPlanCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "ClusterServiceVersionCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "CustomResourceDefinitionCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "DeploymentCompliant",
-					Status: "True",
-				},
-				{
-					Type:   "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
-					Status: "False",
-				},
-			},
-		},
-	}
-
-	// upgradesAvailable
-	testPolicy.Status.Conditions[3].Status = "False"
-	complianceCond := calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "NonCompliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-
-	testPolicy.Spec.ComplianceConfig.UpgradesAvailable = "Compliant"
-	complianceCond = calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "Compliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-
-	// CatalogSourcesUnhealthy
-	testPolicy.Status.Conditions[7].Status = "True"
-	complianceCond = calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "NonCompliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-
-	testPolicy.Spec.ComplianceConfig.CatalogSourceUnhealthy = "Compliant"
-	complianceCond = calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "Compliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-
-	// DeploymentsUnavailable
-	testPolicy.Status.Conditions[6].Status = "False"
-	complianceCond = calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "NonCompliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-
-	testPolicy.Spec.ComplianceConfig.DeploymentsUnavailable = "Compliant"
-	complianceCond = calculateComplianceCondition(testPolicy)
-	assert.Equal(t, "Compliant", complianceCond.Reason)
-}
+var overrideMsg = " - ignore, compliance overridden by complianceConfig"
 
 func TestExistingInstallPlanObj(t *testing.T) {
 	// Empty InstallPlan
@@ -127,6 +35,47 @@ func TestExistingInstallPlanObj(t *testing.T) {
 	assert.Equal(t, "NonCompliant", res.Compliant)
 }
 
+func TestBuildDeploymentCond(t *testing.T) {
+	complianceConfig := policyv1beta1.Compliant
+	depsExist := true                                  // if any deployments
+	unavailableDeps := make([]appsv1.Deployment, 0, 1) // deployments are there, but no available
+
+	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with available deployments
+	cond := buildDeploymentCond(complianceConfig, depsExist, unavailableDeps)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
+	assert.NotContains(t, cond.Message, overrideMsg)
+
+	// Test NonCompliant complianceConfig with available deployments
+	complianceConfig = policyv1beta1.NonCompliant
+	cond = buildDeploymentCond(complianceConfig, depsExist, unavailableDeps)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
+	assert.Equal(t, "all operator Deployments have their minimum availability", cond.Message)
+
+	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with unavailable deployments
+	testDeployment := appsv1.Deployment{
+		TypeMeta: metav1.TypeMeta{},
+		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{
+			Name: "TestDeployment",
+		},
+		Spec: appsv1.DeploymentSpec{},
+		Status: appsv1.DeploymentStatus{
+			UnavailableReplicas: 1,
+		},
+	}
+	complianceConfig = policyv1beta1.Compliant
+
+	unavailableDeps = append(unavailableDeps, testDeployment)
+	cond = buildDeploymentCond(complianceConfig, depsExist, unavailableDeps)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
+	assert.Contains(t, cond.Message, overrideMsg)
+
+	// Test NonCompliance complianceConfig with unavailable deployments
+	complianceConfig = policyv1beta1.NonCompliant
+	cond = buildDeploymentCond(complianceConfig, depsExist, unavailableDeps)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionFalse, cond.Status)
+	assert.Equal(t, "the deployments TestDeployment do not have their minimum availability", cond.Message)
+}
+
 func TestExistingDeploymentObj(t *testing.T) {
 	testDeployment := &appsv1.Deployment{
 		TypeMeta:   metav1.TypeMeta{},
@@ -165,11 +114,42 @@ func TestExistingDeploymentObj(t *testing.T) {
 	assert.Equal(t, "Deployment Available", res.Reason)
 }
 
+func TestCatalogSourceFindCond(t *testing.T) {
+	complianceConfig := policyv1beta1.Compliant
+	isUnhealthy := false
+	isMissing := false
+	name := "TestCatalog"
+
+	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with healthy CatalogSource
+	cond := catalogSourceFindCond(complianceConfig, isUnhealthy, isMissing, name)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionFalse, cond.Status)
+	assert.NotContains(t, cond.Message, overrideMsg)
+
+	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with unhealthy CatalogSource
+	isUnhealthy = true
+	cond = catalogSourceFindCond(complianceConfig, isUnhealthy, isMissing, name)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionFalse, cond.Status)
+	assert.Contains(t, cond.Message, overrideMsg)
+
+	// Test NonCompliant complianceConfig with healthy CatalogSource
+	isUnhealthy = false
+	complianceConfig = policyv1beta1.NonCompliant
+	cond = catalogSourceFindCond(complianceConfig, isUnhealthy, isMissing, name)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionFalse, cond.Status)
+	assert.Equal(t, "CatalogSource was found", cond.Message)
+
+	// Test NonCompliant complianceConfig with unhealthy CatalogSource
+	isUnhealthy = true
+	cond = catalogSourceFindCond(complianceConfig, isUnhealthy, isMissing, name)
+	assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
+	assert.Equal(t, "CatalogSource was found but is unhealthy", cond.Message)
+}
+
 func TestCatalogSourceObj(t *testing.T) {
 	catalogName := "TestCatalog"
 	catalogNS := "TestNamespace"
 
-	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with no healthy CatalogSource
+	// Test Compliant complianceConfig with healthy CatalogSource
 	isUnhealthy := false
 	isMissing := false
 	complianceConfig := policyv1beta1.ComplianceConfigAction("Compliant")
@@ -185,7 +165,7 @@ func TestCatalogSourceObj(t *testing.T) {
 	assert.Equal(t, "Compliant", res.Compliant)
 	assert.Equal(t, "Resource found as expected but is unhealthy", res.Reason)
 
-	// Test NonCompliant complianceConfig with no healthy CatalogSource
+	// Test NonCompliant complianceConfig with healthy CatalogSource
 	isUnhealthy = false
 	isMissing = false
 	complianceConfig = "NonCompliant"

test/e2e/case38_install_operator_test.go

@@ -1107,7 +1107,7 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 			By("Checking the conditions and relatedObj in the policy")
 			check(
 				OpPlcName,
-				true,
+				false,
 				[]policyv1.RelatedObject{{
 					Object: policyv1.ObjectResource{
 						Kind:       "CatalogSource",
@@ -1117,14 +1117,15 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 							Namespace: opPolTestNS,
 						},
 					},
-					Compliant: "NonCompliant",
+					Compliant: "Compliant",
 					Reason:    "Resource not found but should exist",
 				}},
 				metav1.Condition{
-					Type:    "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
-					Status:  metav1.ConditionTrue,
-					Reason:  "CatalogSourcesNotFound",
-					Message: "CatalogSource 'fakeName' was not found",
+					Type:   "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
+					Status: metav1.ConditionFalse,
+					Reason: "CatalogSourcesNotFound",
+					Message: "CatalogSource 'fakeName' was not found" +
+						" - ignore, compliance overridden by complianceConfig",
 				},
 				"CatalogSource 'fakeName' was not found",
 			)
@@ -1141,7 +1142,7 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 			By("Checking the conditions and relatedObj in the policy")
 			check(
 				OpPlcName,
-				true,
+				false,
 				[]policyv1.RelatedObject{{
 					Object: policyv1.ObjectResource{
 						Kind:       "CatalogSource",
@@ -1151,23 +1152,23 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 							Namespace: opPolTestNS,
 						},
 					},
-					Compliant: "NonCompliant",
+					Compliant: "Compliant",
 					Reason:    "Resource found as expected but is unhealthy",
 				}},
 				metav1.Condition{
-					Type:    "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
-					Status:  metav1.ConditionTrue,
-					Reason:  "CatalogSourcesFoundUnhealthy",
-					Message: "CatalogSource was found but is unhealthy",
+					Type:   "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
+					Status: metav1.ConditionFalse,
+					Reason: "CatalogSourcesFoundUnhealthy",
+					Message: "CatalogSource was found but is unhealthy" +
+						" - ignore, compliance overridden by complianceConfig",
 				},
 				"CatalogSource was found but is unhealthy",
 			)
 		})
 		It("Should become Compliant when ComplianceConfig is modified", func() {
 			By("Patching the policy ComplianceConfig to Compliant")
 			utils.Kubectl("patch", "operatorpolicy", OpPlcName, "-n", opPolTestNS, "--type=json", "-p",
-				`[{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/complianceConfig/catalogSourceUnhealthy", 
-				"value": "Compliant"}]`)
+				`[{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/complianceConfig/catalogSourceUnhealthy", "value": "Compliant"}]`)
 
 			By("Checking the conditions and relatedObj in the policy")
 			check(
@@ -1187,7 +1188,7 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 				}},
 				metav1.Condition{
 					Type:    "CatalogSourcesUnhealthy",
-					Status:  metav1.ConditionTrue,
+					Status:  metav1.ConditionFalse,
 					Reason:  "CatalogSourcesFoundUnhealthy",
 					Message: "CatalogSource was found but is unhealthy",
 				},
@@ -1303,6 +1304,36 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 
 				return len(ipList.Items)
 			}, olmWaitTimeout, 5, ctx).Should(Equal(1))
+			check(
+				opPolName,
+				false,
+				[]policyv1.RelatedObject{{
+					Object: policyv1.ObjectResource{
+						Kind:       "InstallPlan",
+						APIVersion: "operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1",
+						Metadata: policyv1.ObjectMetadata{
+							Namespace: opPolTestNS,
+						},
+					},
+					Compliant: "Compliant",
+					Reason:    "The InstallPlan is RequiresApproval",
+				}},
+				metav1.Condition{
+					Type:   "InstallPlanCompliant",
+					Status: metav1.ConditionTrue,
+					Reason: "InstallPlanRequiresApproval",
+					Message: "an InstallPlan to update to [strimzi-cluster-operator.v0.36.0] is available for approval" +
+						" - ignore, compliance overridden by complianceConfig",
+				},
+				"an InstallPlan to update .* is available for approval",
+			)
+		})
+		It("Should become NonCompliant when ComplianceConfig is modified to NonCompliant", func(ctx SpecContext) {
+			By("Patching the policy ComplianceConfig to Compliant")
+			utils.Kubectl("patch", "operatorpolicy", opPolName, "-n", opPolTestNS, "--type=json", "-p",
+				`[{"op": "replace", "path": "/spec/complianceConfig/upgradesAvailable", "value": "NonCompliant"}]`)
+
+			By("Checking the conditions and relatedObj in the policy")
 			check(
 				opPolName,
 				true,
@@ -3018,7 +3049,7 @@ var _ = Describe("Testing OperatorPolicy", Ordered, Label("supports-hosted"), fu
 			Expect(remBehavior).To(HaveKeyWithValue("customResourceDefinitions", "Keep"))
 		})
 	})
-	FDescribe("Testing defaulted values of ComplianceConfig in an OperatorPolicy", func() {
+	Describe("Testing defaulted values of ComplianceConfig in an OperatorPolicy", func() {
 		const (
 			opPolYAML = "../resources/case38_operator_install/operator-policy-no-group.yaml"
 			opPolName = "oppol-no-group"