:seedling: Make webhook support e2es more robust by perdasilva · Pull Request #2111 · operator-framework/operator-controller

perdasilva · 2025-07-21T09:31:39Z

Description

The webhook e2e tests were failing downstream. It seems that waiting for the deployment to be available is not sufficient signal to be sure that the webhook service is working. In this PR, we wrap the creation and testing of the webhook operator test CR with an Eventually to be more tolerant to transient errors of the sort:

failed calling webhook \"mwebhooktest.kb.io\": failed to call webhook: Post \"[https://webhook-operator-webhook-service.webhook-operator.svc:443/mutate-webhook-operators-coreos-io-v1-webhooktest?timeout=10s](https://webhook-operator-webhook-service.webhook-operator.svc/mutate-webhook-operators-coreos-io-v1-webhooktest?timeout=10s)\": dial tcp 10.129.2.15:4343: connect: connection refused

Testing against clusterbot 4.20 techpreview:

$ make experimental-e2e
go test -count=1 -v ./test/experimental-e2e/...
=== RUN   TestNoop
    experimental_e2e_test.go:59: Running experimental-e2e tests
--- PASS: TestNoop (0.00s)
=== RUN   TestWebhookSupport
    experimental_e2e_test.go:64: Test support for bundles with webhooks
    experimental_e2e_test.go:67: By creating install namespace, and necessary rbac resources
    experimental_e2e_test.go:112: By creating the webhook-operator ClusterCatalog
    experimental_e2e_test.go:133: By waiting for the catalog to serve its metadata
    experimental_e2e_test.go:143: By installing the webhook-operator ClusterExtension
    experimental_e2e_test.go:169: By waiting for webhook-operator extension to be installed successfully
    experimental_e2e_test.go:183: By waiting for webhook-operator deployment to be available
    experimental_e2e_test.go:203: By checking an invalid CR is rejected by the validating webhook
    experimental_e2e_test.go:211: By checking a valid CR is mutated by the mutating webhook
    experimental_e2e_test.go:227: By checking a valid CR is converted to v2 by the conversion webhook
--- PASS: TestWebhookSupport (14.61s)
PASS
ok      github.com/operator-framework/operator-controller/test/experimental-e2e 14.623s

Reviewer Checklist

API Go Documentation
Tests: Unit Tests (and E2E Tests, if appropriate)
Comprehensive Commit Messages
Links to related GitHub Issue(s)

netlify · 2025-07-21T09:31:44Z

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`f094654`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/olmv1/deploys/687e451e8677b000088b5855
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2111--olmv1.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

codecov · 2025-07-21T09:42:39Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.60%. Comparing base (5786e67) to head (f094654).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2111   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   73.60%   73.60%           
=======================================
  Files          78       78           
  Lines        7260     7260           
=======================================
  Hits         5344     5344           
  Misses       1566     1566           
  Partials      350      350

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	`43.67% <ø> (-0.05%)`	⬇️
experimental-e2e	`56.38% <ø> (ø)`
unit	`58.88% <ø> (ø)`

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T12:08:14Z

+		if assert.NotNil(ct, cond) {
+			assert.Equal(ct, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
+			assert.Equal(ct, ocv1.ReasonAvailable, cond.Reason)
+		}


At a quick glance, the current code might misleadingly suggest that if cond never becomes non-nil within the timeout, the test would not fail — giving the impression that it could pass silently.

To make this behavior more explicit and ensure that nil conditions are clearly reported during retries, I propose changing the inner logic to:

Suggested change

if assert.NotNil(ct, cond) {

assert.Equal(ct, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)

assert.Equal(ct, ocv1.ReasonAvailable, cond.Reason)

}

if !assert.NotNil(t, cond) {

// Keep retrying until cond is not nil

return

}

if !assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status) {

// Keep retrying until condition status is true

return

}

if !assert.Equal(t, ocv1.ReasonAvailable, cond.Reason) {

// Keep retrying until reason is available

return

}

IHMO ^ less flake as well I think

camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T12:09:02Z

-			assert.NotEmpty(ct, clusterExtension.Status.Install.Bundle)
+			if assert.NotNil(ct, clusterExtension.Status.Install) {
+				assert.NotEmpty(ct, clusterExtension.Status.Install.Bundle)
+			}


camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T12:09:34Z

+	require.EventuallyWithT(t, func(ct *assert.CollectT) {
+		res, err = v2Client.Get(t.Context(), obj.GetName(), metav1.GetOptions{})
+		require.NoError(ct, err)
+	}, pollDuration, pollInterval)


👍 Cool add the EventuallyWithT seems a good thing

camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T12:09:52Z

+	}, pollDuration, pollInterval)
 	t.Cleanup(func() {
-		require.NoError(t, dynamicClient.Resource(v1Gvr).Namespace(namespace.GetName()).Delete(context.Background(), obj.GetName(), metav1.DeleteOptions{}))
+		require.NoError(t, v1Client.Delete(context.Background(), obj.GetName(), metav1.DeleteOptions{}))


👍 seems fine for me

camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T12:10:03Z

+	require.EventuallyWithT(t, func(ct *assert.CollectT) {
+		res, err = v1Client.Create(t.Context(), obj, metav1.CreateOptions{})
+		require.NoError(ct, err)
+	}, pollDuration, pollInterval)


👍 Cool add the EventuallyWithT seems a good thing

camilamacedo86

Great 👍
Terrific 🥇

perdasilva · 2025-07-21T13:16:37Z

/hold

perdasilva · 2025-07-21T13:19:51Z

/unhold

perdasilva · 2025-07-21T13:29:29Z

/hold

perdasilva · 2025-07-21T13:42:01Z

/unhold

Signed-off-by: Per Goncalves da Silva <pegoncal@redhat.com>

camilamacedo86 · 2025-07-21T13:58:02Z

/lgtm

tmshort · 2025-07-21T14:25:16Z

DON'T click the [Squash and merge] button until @grokspawn has a chance to look at tide/prow.

openshift-ci · 2025-07-21T15:13:02Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, grokspawn

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~~ [camilamacedo86,grokspawn]

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

perdasilva requested a review from a team as a code owner July 21, 2025 09:31

openshift-ci Bot requested review from ankitathomas and grokspawn July 21, 2025 09:31

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch 3 times, most recently from 5b6ca9a to c0a263e Compare July 21, 2025 09:50

perdasilva changed the title ~~🐛 Make webhook support e2es more robust~~ 🌱 Make webhook support e2es more robust Jul 21, 2025

camilamacedo86 reviewed Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch from c0a263e to 6be3d45 Compare July 21, 2025 13:04

camilamacedo86 approved these changes Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci Bot assigned camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

openshift-ci Bot added lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Jul 21, 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 Jul 21, 2025

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch from 6be3d45 to 7a9241f Compare July 21, 2025 13:19

openshift-ci Bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 21, 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 Jul 21, 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 Jul 21, 2025

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch from 7a9241f to 57cf211 Compare July 21, 2025 13:30

openshift-ci Bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jul 21, 2025

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch from 57cf211 to 4a5a683 Compare July 21, 2025 13:47

Make webhook support e2es more robust

f094654

Signed-off-by: Per Goncalves da Silva <pegoncal@redhat.com>

perdasilva force-pushed the webhook-e2e-fixes branch from 4a5a683 to f094654 Compare July 21, 2025 13:48

openshift-ci Bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 21, 2025

grokspawn approved these changes Jul 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci Bot assigned grokspawn Jul 21, 2025

openshift-merge-bot Bot merged commit b5a475a into operator-framework:main Jul 21, 2025
21 checks passed

-		if assert.NotNil(ct, cond) {
-			assert.Equal(ct, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status)
-			assert.Equal(ct, ocv1.ReasonAvailable, cond.Reason)
-		}
+if !assert.NotNil(t, cond) {
+	// Keep retrying until cond is not nil
+	return
+}
+if !assert.Equal(t, metav1.ConditionTrue, cond.Status) {
+	// Keep retrying until condition status is true
+	return
+}
+if !assert.Equal(t, ocv1.ReasonAvailable, cond.Reason) {
+	// Keep retrying until reason is available
+	return
+}

Conversation

perdasilva commented Jul 21, 2025

Description

Reviewer Checklist

Uh oh!

netlify Bot commented Jul 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

✅ Deploy Preview for olmv1 ready!

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Jul 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

perdasilva commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

perdasilva commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

perdasilva commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

perdasilva commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

camilamacedo86 commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

tmshort commented Jul 21, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented Jul 21, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

netlify Bot commented Jul 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jul 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

camilamacedo86 Jul 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

tmshort commented Jul 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading