e2e: make running subsets of e2e tests more organized #1512
Conversation
hj-johannes-lee
requested review from
mythi,
bart0sh,
ozhuraki,
kad and
tkatila
as code owners
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1512 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 49.54% 49.48% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 42 42
Lines 4923 4923
==========================================
- Hits 2439 2436 -3
- Misses 2343 2345 +2
- Partials 141 142 +1
... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
|
I realize it's still WIP but two quick comments: 1) |
|
@mythi Thank you for your comment! :)
|
|
hj-johannes-lee
changed the title
hj-johannes-lee
changed the title
hj-johannes-lee
changed the title
hj-johannes-lee
changed the title
|
About the matter of changing everything that has 'demo' to 'app'.. I thought it would take long time to change everything, and it is not actually related to this PR that much, so I just didn't touch anything. Just changed the label from "Demo" to "App". In addition, I also wrote the further instruction of using labels and running subsets of tests in It seems that CI fails, but don't think it is related to this PR? |
That was my ask, so good that you did not do anything else |
| @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ const ( | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| func init() { | |||
| ginkgo.Describe("DLB plugin", describe) | |||
| ginkgo.Describe("DLB plugin [Device:dlb]", describe) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have a good suggestion but it looks that now these node descriptions have a lot of repeating words. Since each description is modified by this PR, I was wondering if it made sense to reword them a bit. How does the output look for a device when all tests are run?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, I also thought about this matter, and have been thinking for a long time after you wrote this comment, but I could not think either.
I took a look e2e tests in Kubernetes, but they also repeat in many cases.
e.g.
- ginkgo.It("should increase cluster size if pending pods are small [Feature:ClusterSizeAutoscalingScaleUp]", func(ctx context.Context){})
- ginkgo.It("shouldn't increase cluster size if pending pod is too large [Feature:ClusterSizeAutoscalingScaleUp]", func(ctx context.Context) {})
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, in our case, we have many layers so.. it would look dirtier though..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can keep it as it is but I feel it could be optimized. Like: how many times QAT is mentioned on that row? Or, would ginkgo.Describe("[Device:dlb] plugin", describe) be any worse? Just thinking out loud.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Like: how many times QAT is mentioned on that row?
Umm, that is not related to this PR..! They are already mentioned multiple times without the labels.. :(
Do you want me to refine that in general?
ginkgo.Describe("[Device:dlb] plugin", describe)
Actually it was what I was thinking at first,, but then have no idea for [Resource] or [App] because some verbs (e.g. 'deploys') or 'When' should be before the labels...
For example,
Describe("[Device:qat] plugin in [Mode:dpdk")
Context("When [Resource:generic] are available")
It("deploys [App:compress-perf] requesting QAT resources")
To me,, this looked more messy because labels seem like to be in random places...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Umm, that is not related to this PR..! They are already mentioned multiple times without the labels.. :(
My original comment was just "something for you to think about". It's not directly related to this PR but here we are modifying these lines so there could be an opportunity to have refinements included in the same changes.
Signed-off-by: Hyeongju Johannes Lee <[email protected]>
…g subsets Signed-off-by: Hyeongju Johannes Lee <[email protected]>
Strictly speaking, 'Gen4' and 'Gen2' are wrong expressions in this case, because Gen4 resources are read as 'generic' in VMs. To prevent any confusion, use just the names of the QAT services such as 'dc', 'cy' or 'generic' Signed-off-by: Hyeongju Johannes Lee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Hyeongju Johannes Lee <[email protected]>
closes: #1143