Skip to content

✨ Add tests in controller that use source.Channel #1373

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 24, 2021
Merged

✨ Add tests in controller that use source.Channel #1373

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 24, 2021

Conversation

varshaprasad96
Copy link
Member

@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 commented Feb 6, 2021 •
edited by alvaroaleman
Loading

The additional tests verify controller implementation when source.Channel is passed.

Fixes #1368
Will also be helpful for discussing #1346

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Feb 6, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @varshaprasad96. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 6, 2021
@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2021
Closed
@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 force-pushed the test/waitforSync-channels branch 2 times, most recently from 9c8b6ba to 70b92a8 Compare February 6, 2021 01:36
@vincepri
Copy link
Member

vincepri commented Feb 9, 2021

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Feb 9, 2021
alvaroaleman
alvaroaleman reviewed Feb 10, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for taking the time for this!

pkg/internal/controller/controller_test.go

ins := &source.Channel{Source: ch}
ins.DestBufferSize = 1
Expect(inject.StopChannelInto(ctx.Done(), ins)).To(BeTrue())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We just deprecated the injection, lets not add more code that uses it

Copy link
Member Author

@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 Feb 12, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While starting the source (with source.channel) we check if the stop channel has been injected and return an error if not (here). I think we may have to modify the implementation while starting source.channel to remove this or is there any other way to go about this?

pkg/internal/controller/controller_test.go Outdated

errChan := make(chan error)

go func() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comment re extra routine

pkg/internal/controller/controller_test.go Outdated

errChan := make(chan error)

go func() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We can simplify this by not starting in a goroutine that writes into a channel and then waiting for the channel and instead just start in the main goroutine or not?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is blocking. Starting in main routine is causing the test to time out.

Copy link
Member

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman Feb 16, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know its blocking, my point was that its needlessly complicated to start it in a distinct goroutine.

errChan := make(chan error)
go func(){
  errChan <- someFunc()
}()
e := <-errChan

Is definitely semantically equivalent to

e := someFunc()

The test here works fine for me when changing it like described above and does not time out.

@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 force-pushed the test/waitforSync-channels branch from 70b92a8 to aa45ffa Compare February 12, 2021 19:06
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 12, 2021
@varshaprasad96
✨ Add testcases in controller when source.Channel
6c8bd4c 
is passed

Added tests to verify the controller
implementation when `source.Channel`
is passed.

Signed-off-by: varshaprasad96 <[email protected]>
@varshaprasad96 varshaprasad96 force-pushed the test/waitforSync-channels branch from aa45ffa to 6c8bd4c Compare February 23, 2021 21:16
@alvaroaleman
Copy link
Member

/retest

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman changed the title (:sparkles:) Add tests in controller that use source.Channel ✨ Add tests in controller that use source.Channel Feb 24, 2021
alvaroaleman
alvaroaleman approved these changes Feb 24, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 24, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alvaroaleman, varshaprasad96

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 24, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 5fd8414 into kubernetes-sigs:master Feb 24, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman alvaroaleman approved these changes

@alexeldeib alexeldeib Awaiting requested review from alexeldeib

@droot droot Awaiting requested review from droot

Assignees

@alvaroaleman alvaroaleman

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add integration test that uses source.Channel
4 participants
@varshaprasad96 @k8s-ci-robot @vincepri @alvaroaleman