STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case #30562

duanwei33 · 2025-12-03T11:12:39Z

Adding LSO network policy test cases

LSO(and other 3rd Operator) test strategy:
After discussing with the team, we decided not to install/uninstall the Operator/Operand during standard tests, as this would incur significant overhead across all our CI pipelines.
Instead, we will define specific jobs where the Operator/Operand is pre-installed. This approach allows us to cover all configuration-related tests efficiently and with low cost.

Test records:

passed: (11.3s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels for LSO [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.1s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSI related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.6s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSO related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.8s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for LSO related resources [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (12.5s) 2025-12-03T13:17:00 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-03T11:12:42Z

Pipeline controller notification
This repo is configured to use the pipeline controller. Second-stage tests will be triggered either automatically or after lgtm label is added, depending on the repository configuration. The pipeline controller will automatically detect which contexts are required and will utilize /test Prow commands to trigger the second stage.

For optional jobs, comment /test ? to see a list of all defined jobs. To trigger manually all jobs from second stage use /pipeline required command.

This repository is configured in: automatic mode

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-03T11:12:43Z

@duanwei33: This pull request references STOR-2550 which is a valid jira issue.

Details

In response to this:

Adding LSO network policy test cases

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-03T11:46:42Z

Scheduling required tests:
/test e2e-aws-csi
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift-serial
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-2of2
/test e2e-gcp-csi
/test e2e-gcp-ovn
/test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn-upi

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-03T13:21:52Z

@duanwei33: This pull request references STOR-2550 which is a valid jira issue.

Details

In response to this:

Adding LSO network policy test cases

Test records:

passed: (11.3s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels for LSO [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.1s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSI related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.6s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSO related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.8s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for LSO related resources [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (12.5s) 2025-12-03T13:17:00 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-03T13:52:44Z

@duanwei33: This pull request references STOR-2550 which is a valid jira issue.

Details

In response to this:

Adding LSO network policy test cases

LSO(and other 3rd Operator) test strategy:
After discussing with the team, we decided not to install/uninstall the Operator/Operand during standard tests, as this would incur significant overhead across all our CI pipelines.
Instead, we will define specific jobs where the Operator/Operand is pre-installed. This approach allows us to cover all configuration-related tests efficiently and with low cost.

Test records:
passed: (11.3s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels for LSO [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.1s) 2025-12-03T13:16:58 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSI related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.6s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for CSO related Operators [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (11.8s) 2025-12-03T13:16:59 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should verify required labels for LSO related resources [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"
passed: (12.5s) 2025-12-03T13:17:00 "[sig-storage][OCPFeature:StorageNetworkPolicy] Storage Network Policy should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]"

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Phaow · 2025-12-04T07:19:46Z

test/extended/storage/storage_networkpolicy.go

+		if !lsoInstallInfo.Installed {
+			g.Skip("LSO is not installed on this cluster")
+		} else if !isLSOVersionSupported(lsoInstallInfo.Version) {
+			g.Skip(fmt.Sprintf("LSO network policy support requires version >= 4.21.0, current version: %s", lsoInstallInfo.Version))
+		}


Suggested change

if !lsoInstallInfo.Installed {

g.Skip("LSO is not installed on this cluster")

} else if !isLSOVersionSupported(lsoInstallInfo.Version) {

g.Skip(fmt.Sprintf("LSO network policy support requires version >= 4.21.0, current version: %s", lsoInstallInfo.Version))

}

if !lsoInstallInfo.Installed {

g.Skip("LSO is not installed on this cluster")

}

if !isLSOVersionSupported(lsoInstallInfo.Version) {

g.Skip(fmt.Sprintf("LSO network policy support requires version >= 4.21.0, current version: %s", lsoInstallInfo.Version))

}

will be more readable.

Okay, it looks clear, will update later.

@Phaow I have updated the code, but I'm not sure why it doesn't show "Outdated" in the GUI.

Could you check if you have any other comments?

Phaow · 2025-12-04T07:26:16Z

test/extended/storage/storage_networkpolicy.go

+			g.Skip(fmt.Sprintf("LSO network policy support requires version >= 4.21.0, current version: %s", lsoInstallInfo.Version))
+		}
+
+		LSOResourcesToCheck := []resourceCheck{


Maybe we could also consider just append it to CSIResourcesToCheck if lso is installed.

Thanks for the comment. I once considered combining, but it will give us the clear result from the case level (skipped if LSO is not installed), so I think we can keep this :)

ok, we could keep it, from the reports scope makes sense.

Phaow · 2025-12-04T07:28:15Z

test/extended/storage/storage_networkpolicy.go

+		runResourceChecks(oc, LSOResourcesToCheck, currentPlatform)
+	})
+
+	g.It("should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels for LSO", func() {


The same above, we could just append it in g.It("should ensure required NetworkPolicies exist with correct labels"

The same above :)

dobsonj · 2025-12-06T01:02:20Z

test/extended/storage/storage_networkpolicy.go

+	// Get all CSVs across all namespaces matching local-storage-operator pattern
+	// Command: oc get csv -A -o json
+	output, err := oc.AsAdmin().Run("get").Args("csv", "-A", "-o", "json").Output()
+	if err != nil {
+		return info, fmt.Errorf("failed to list ClusterServiceVersions: %v", err)
+	}
+
+	// Parse the JSON output to find local-storage-operator CSV
+	// The output contains a list of CSVs with metadata.name and metadata.namespace
+	var csvList struct {
+		Items []struct {
+			Metadata struct {
+				Name      string `json:"name"`
+				Namespace string `json:"namespace"`
+			} `json:"metadata"`
+			Spec struct {
+				Version string `json:"version"`
+			} `json:"spec"`
+			Status struct {
+				Phase string `json:"phase"`
+			} `json:"status"`
+		} `json:"items"`
+	}
+
+	if err := json.Unmarshal([]byte(output), &csvList); err != nil {
+		return info, fmt.Errorf("failed to parse CSV list: %v", err)
+	}
+
+	// Search for local-storage-operator CSV
+	for _, csv := range csvList.Items {
+		// Match CSV name pattern: local-storage-operator.*
+		if strings.HasPrefix(csv.Metadata.Name, "local-storage-operator") {
+			// Only consider CSVs in Succeeded phase
+			if csv.Status.Phase == "Succeeded" {
+				info.Installed = true
+				info.Namespace = csv.Metadata.Namespace
+				info.Version = csv.Spec.Version
+				return info, nil
+			}
+		}
+	}


There may be a better way to do this. oc.AsAdmin().Run() spawns a new oc process, then there is a new custom struct to unmarshal the text output. You could instead use the API types directly from operator-framework here:
https://github.com/operator-framework/api/blob/ebdb4e0b321b668f7bc5146e2972b1ce4529d109/pkg/operators/v1alpha1/clusterserviceversion_types.go#L601-L619

oadp-operator for example imports the API here:
https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/blob/oadp-dev/must-gather/pkg/cli.go#L15
then adds it to the scheme here:
https://github.com/openshift/oadp-operator/blob/oadp-dev/must-gather/pkg/cli.go#L82

IMO, you should at least be able to use ClusterServiceVersionList from the operator-framework repo, instead of defining the new csvList struct here. Even better if you can add some new method to test/extended/util/client.go to get a client that supports ClusterServiceVersion so you could list CSV's the same way you list NetworkPolicies and avoid oc.AsAdmin().Run().

Thanks for the suggestion. I followed the example to use typed controller-runtime client, it looks better, could you help take a look?
But I have to be careful of the dependency update due to the github.com/operator-framework/api introduced.

The new code looks good, thanks for making this change :)
I don't see any obvious problem with the dependency updates.

dobsonj · 2025-12-06T01:12:35Z

Instead, we will define specific jobs where the Operator/Operand is pre-installed. This approach allows us to cover all configuration-related tests efficiently and with low cost.

@duanwei33 Does this mean you will have a follow-up PR to openshift/release to define a new workflow to install LSO and run this test?

duanwei33 · 2025-12-11T12:56:09Z

/hold
(Need to verify more tests due to the dependency update)

duanwei33 · 2025-12-11T13:00:39Z

Instead, we will define specific jobs where the Operator/Operand is pre-installed. This approach allows us to cover all configuration-related tests efficiently and with low cost.

@duanwei33 Does this mean you will have a follow-up PR to openshift/release to define a new workflow to install LSO and run this test?

Yes you are right. wdyt of this idea?

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-11T13:34:22Z

Scheduling required tests:
/test e2e-aws-csi
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift-serial
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-2of2
/test e2e-gcp-csi
/test e2e-gcp-ovn
/test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn-upi

dobsonj · 2025-12-11T22:25:27Z

Instead, we will define specific jobs where the Operator/Operand is pre-installed. This approach allows us to cover all configuration-related tests efficiently and with low cost.

@duanwei33 Does this mean you will have a follow-up PR to openshift/release to define a new workflow to install LSO and run this test?

Yes you are right. wdyt of this idea?

Works for me, just wanted to understand how it will run, since existing LSO presubmits don't call this (yet).

dobsonj · 2025-12-11T22:28:08Z

/retest
?

duanwei33 · 2025-12-12T02:45:06Z

/retest

dobsonj · 2025-12-12T22:50:31Z

/lgtm

duanwei33 · 2025-12-15T01:13:11Z

/hold cancel

Phaow · 2025-12-15T01:33:52Z

go.mod

-go 1.24.0
+go 1.24.6
+
+toolchain go1.24.11


Go will prefer or auto-download Go 1.24.11, is this expected? We'd better use the builder go version consistently.

Phaow · 2025-12-15T01:37:18Z

Others LGTM.

refactor LSO network policy test to use operator-framework API

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-15T03:39:27Z

Scheduling required tests:
/test e2e-aws-csi
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift
/test e2e-aws-ovn-microshift-serial
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-1of2
/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial-2of2
/test e2e-gcp-csi
/test e2e-gcp-ovn
/test e2e-gcp-ovn-upgrade
/test e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn
/test e2e-vsphere-ovn-upi

Phaow · 2025-12-15T06:41:43Z

/lgtm

duanwei33 · 2025-12-16T11:55:41Z

@DennisPeriquet
Hi, could you please help review and approve it?

DennisPeriquet · 2025-12-16T15:45:28Z

@duanwei33 I am no expert here but I see other people have LGTM'ed.

Please keep an eye on any blocking jobs that might fail with these changes and be ready to revert as needed.

/approve

openshift-ci · 2025-12-16T15:46:01Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: DennisPeriquet, dobsonj, duanwei33, Phaow

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [DennisPeriquet]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

duanwei33 · 2025-12-17T04:26:15Z

/label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only
Needed to add coverage for new 4.21 feature.

duanwei33 · 2025-12-17T07:52:37Z

/verified by CI

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-17T07:52:49Z

@duanwei33: This PR has been marked as verified by CI.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by CI

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-17T08:49:00Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 26236de and 2 for PR HEAD 2f72685 in total

duanwei33 · 2025-12-17T12:43:00Z

/retest-required

dobsonj · 2025-12-17T15:53:47Z

/retest

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-17T18:33:28Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 89d0a87 and 1 for PR HEAD 2f72685 in total

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-12-18T12:48:01Z

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 553fdbc and 0 for PR HEAD 2f72685 in total

openshift-ci · 2025-12-18T13:00:52Z

@duanwei33: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Dec 3, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 3, 2025

openshift-ci bot requested review from jsafrane and tsmetana December 3, 2025 11:13

duanwei33 changed the title ~~WIP: STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case~~ STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case Dec 3, 2025

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 3, 2025

Phaow reviewed Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

dobsonj reviewed Dec 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot added the vendor-update Touching vendor dir or related files label Dec 11, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 11, 2025

openshift-ci bot assigned dobsonj Dec 12, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 12, 2025

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 15, 2025

Phaow reviewed Dec 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

add LSO network policy test case

2f72685

refactor LSO network policy test to use operator-framework API

duanwei33 force-pushed the STOR-2550 branch from 9c4fe2a to 2f72685 Compare December 15, 2025 03:10

openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 15, 2025

openshift-ci bot assigned Phaow Dec 15, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 15, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 16, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the acknowledge-critical-fixes-only Indicates if the issuer of the label is OK with the policy. label Dec 17, 2025

openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Dec 17, 2025

openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit f641fde into openshift:main Dec 18, 2025
20 checks passed

duanwei33 mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2025

OCPBUGS-69844: Revert "STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case" #30625

Closed

duanwei33 mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

OCPBUGS-73778: revert LSO networkpolicy cases #30684

Merged

STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case #30562

STOR-2550: add LSO network policy test case #30562

Uh oh!

Conversation

duanwei33 commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited by openshift-ci bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited by openshift-ci bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited by openshift-ci bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dobsonj commented Dec 6, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

dobsonj commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

dobsonj commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

dobsonj commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 15, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Phaow commented Dec 15, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 15, 2025

Uh oh!

Phaow commented Dec 15, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

DennisPeriquet commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 17, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 17, 2025

Uh oh!

duanwei33 commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited by openshift-ci bot

Loading

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited by openshift-ci bot

Loading

openshift-ci-robot commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited by openshift-ci bot

Loading