Skip to content

fix(e2e): poll for ovs-ovn pod readiness instead of single snapshot check #6364

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

Merged
oilbeater merged 1 commit into from
Feb 27, 2026
Merged

fix(e2e): poll for ovs-ovn pod readiness instead of single snapshot check #6364

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
31 changes: 18 additions & 13 deletions test/e2e/connectivity/e2e_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -253,20 +253,25 @@ var _ = framework.OrderedDescribe("[group:disaster]", func() {
ginkgo.By("Waiting for DaemonSet ovs-ovn to be ready")
dsClient.RolloutStatus(ds.Name)

ginkgo.By("Getting pods of DaemonSet ovs-ovn")
pods, err = dsClient.GetPods(ds)
framework.ExpectNoError(err)

ginkgo.By("Getting newly created ovs-ovn pod running on node " + suiteCtx.Node)
for i := range pods.Items {
if pods.Items[i].Spec.NodeName == suiteCtx.Node {
pod = &pods.Items[i]
break
ginkgo.By("Waiting for newly created ovs-ovn pod running on node " + suiteCtx.Node)
pod = nil
framework.WaitUntil(2*time.Second, 2*time.Minute, func(_ context.Context) (bool, error) {
ds = dsClient.Get("ovs-ovn")
pods, err = dsClient.GetPods(ds)
if err != nil {
return false, err
}
}
framework.ExpectNotNil(pod, "no ovs-ovn pod running on node "+suiteCtx.Node)
framework.ExpectEqual(pod.Status.Phase, corev1.PodRunning)
framework.ExpectEqual(pod.Status.ContainerStatuses[0].Ready, true)
for i := range pods.Items {
if pods.Items[i].Spec.NodeName == suiteCtx.Node &&
pods.Items[i].Status.Phase == corev1.PodRunning &&
len(pods.Items[i].Status.ContainerStatuses) != 0 &&
pods.Items[i].Status.ContainerStatuses[0].Ready {
pod = &pods.Items[i]
return true, nil
}
}
Comment on lines +264 to +272
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

The if condition with multiple && operators is a bit long and can be hard to read. To improve readability and maintainability, you could refactor this to first check for the pod on the correct node, and then, in a nested block, check for its readiness. This separation of concerns makes the logic clearer.

            for i := range pods.Items {
                p := &pods.Items[i]
                if p.Spec.NodeName != suiteCtx.Node {
                    continue
                }

                if p.Status.Phase == corev1.PodRunning &&
                    len(p.Status.ContainerStatuses) != 0 &&
                    p.Status.ContainerStatuses[0].Ready {
                    pod = p
                    return true, nil
                }
            }

return false, nil
}, "waiting for ovs-ovn pod on node "+suiteCtx.Node+" to be running and ready")
pod.ManagedFields = nil
framework.Logf("newly created ovs-ovn pod %s:\n%s", pod.Name, format.Object(pod, 2))
})
Expand Down
Loading