-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 83
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.
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
Fail the integration tests on warnings or errors. #581
Conversation
@wjuan-AFK please review and assign back to me once done. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks great, just two questions/thoughts.
Adding @dubious90 in case he can get to this sooner than @wjuan-AFK. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
LGTM |
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Removing all those related to the v2 bootstraps that are no longer present. Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
@oschaaf please take another look after addressing feedback and merging from master. Sorry about the force push, I have fat-fingered a bad rebase into this branch and had to rewrite history to fix it. Same commits were re-applies as cherry-picks. |
@oschaaf please take another look after merging from master. |
@oschaaf fyi this PR needs bit more work. Now that we do have a test which verifies we pass with |
Test cases are matched using regular expressions. Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
@oschaaf this is ready for another review. We can now specify distinct ignore lists based on the name of the executed test case. The test case that purposefully runs with the deprecated Envoy v2 API is now allowed to log the relevant warnings. |
@wjuan-AFK significant changes were made since your last review to allow this to pass tests after #584 was merged in. For your convenience, here is a view that only includes commits related to this change. |
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice, this will be very useful, LGTM
LGTM |
Fails the integration tests if any unknown warnings or errors are found in the logs of the Nighthawk test server.
Includes an ignore list that (for now) accepts known warnings found in the logs, the ignore list can have different content per each test case.
Also:
Attributes:
docstring section onIntegrationTestBase
into its class docstring.__init__
is just a method and should only have theArgs:
section.Fixes #577
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sobon [email protected]