Bug 1981867
| Summary: | [sig-cli] oc explain should contain proper fields description for special types [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | OpenShift Container Platform | Reporter: | Micah Abbott <miabbott> |
| Component: | oc | Assignee: | Maciej Szulik <maszulik> |
| oc sub component: | oc | QA Contact: | zhou ying <yinzhou> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | Docs Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | ||
| Priority: | medium | CC: | aos-bugs, danili, mfojtik, miabbott, sippy, wking |
| Version: | 4.9 | Keywords: | Reopened |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | 4.10.0 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | tag-ci, non-multi-arch LifecycleReset | ||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | No Doc Update | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: |
[sig-cli] oc explain should contain proper fields description for special types [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]
|
|
| Last Closed: | 2022-03-11 18:15:11 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Micah Abbott
2021-07-13 15:18:35 UTC
Looks like a temporary glitch, but I'll need to have a closer look. From what I was looking this failed usually when one of the operands was down causing a particular API not to be available during the test. Can we get another look at this? Seems like it's not particularly rare for some release-informing and -blocking jobs: $ w3m -dump -cols 200 'https://search.ci.openshift.org/?maxAge=168h&type=junit&search=failed%20to%20explain.*exit%20status' | grep 'failures match' | grep '^periodic\|^release' | sort periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-main-e2e-aws-pooled-periodic-conformance (all) - 28 runs, 100% failed, 75% of failures match = 75% impact periodic-ci-openshift-multiarch-master-nightly-4.6-ocp-e2e-remote-libvirt-s390x (all) - 14 runs, 64% failed, 11% of failures match = 7% impact periodic-ci-openshift-multiarch-master-nightly-4.7-ocp-e2e-remote-libvirt-s390x (all) - 15 runs, 80% failed, 8% of failures match = 7% impact periodic-ci-openshift-multiarch-master-nightly-4.8-ocp-e2e-remote-libvirt-s390x (all) - 14 runs, 36% failed, 40% of failures match = 14% impact periodic-ci-openshift-multiarch-master-nightly-4.9-ocp-e2e-remote-libvirt-s390x (all) - 14 runs, 93% failed, 8% of failures match = 7% impact periodic-ci-openshift-ovn-kubernetes-release-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-dualstack-periodic (all) - 7 runs, 43% failed, 33% of failures match = 14% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.10-e2e-gcp-upgrade (all) - 542 runs, 42% failed, 0% of failures match = 0% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.10-upgrade-from-stable-4.9-e2e-azure-upgrade (all) - 492 runs, 95% failed, 1% of failures match = 1% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.7-upgrade-from-stable-4.6-e2e-openstack-upgrade (all) - 2 runs, 100% failed, 50% of failures match = 50% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.8-e2e-gcp (all) - 52 runs, 17% failed, 11% of failures match = 2% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-ci-4.9-e2e-gcp-upgrade (all) - 66 runs, 52% failed, 3% of failures match = 2% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi (all) - 19 runs, 58% failed, 27% of failures match = 16% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6 (all) - 23 runs, 70% failed, 19% of failures match = 13% impact periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi-virtualmedia (all) - 10 runs, 60% failed, 33% of failures match = 20% impact release-openshift-origin-installer-e2e-gcp-compact-4.7 (all) - 3 runs, 100% failed, 33% of failures match = 33% impact In particular, I saw this in a 4.8 release-blocking [1]: : [sig-cli] oc explain should contain proper spec+status for CRDs [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] expand_less 21s fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/cli/explain.go:450]: Unexpected error: <*errors.errorString | 0xc002e7c7a0>: { s: "failed to explain [\"installplans\" \"--api-version=operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1\"]: exit status 1", } failed to explain ["installplans" "--api-version=operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1"]: exit status 1 occurred where stdout has: Oct 27 17:13:48.066: INFO: Error running /usr/bin/oc --namespace=e2e-test-oc-explain-hx9f4 --kubeconfig=/tmp/configfile806360138 explain installplans --api-version=operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1: StdOut> error: couldn't find resource for "operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1, Kind=InstallPlan" despite 17:13Z being almost an hour after the CRD was created: $ curl -s https://gcsweb-ci.apps.ci.l2s4.p1.openshiftapps.com/gcs/origin-ci-test/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6/1453388863056646144/artifacts/e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6/gather-must-gather/artifacts/must-gather.tar | tar xOz quay-io-openshift-release-dev-ocp-v4-0-art-dev-sha256-6f386b0e4757af4e3d07c8dbd7593cc5c1f4463656ff9f476fcde262b5c7ca79/cluster-scoped-resources/apiextensions.k8s.io/customresourcedefinitions/installplans.operators.coreos.com.yaml | yaml2json | jq -r .metadata.creationTimestamp 2021-10-27T16:16:17Z Is this an API-server connectivity hiccup with a poorly-summarized error that makes the connection issue sound like a 404? [1]: https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/origin-ci-test/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.8-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-ipv6/1453388863056646144 This bug hasn't had any activity in the last 30 days. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. As such, we're marking this bug as "LifecycleStale" and decreasing the severity/priority. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please update it, otherwise this bug can be closed in about 7 days. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. Additionally, you can add LifecycleFrozen into Whiteboard if you think this bug should never be marked as stale. Please consult with bug assignee before you do that. This bug hasn't had any activity in the last 30 days. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. As such, we're marking this bug as "LifecycleStale" and decreasing the severity/priority. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please update it, otherwise this bug can be closed in about 7 days. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant. Additionally, you can add LifecycleFrozen into Whiteboard if you think this bug should never be marked as stale. Please consult with bug assignee before you do that. The LifecycleStale keyword was removed because the bug moved to QE. The bug assignee was notified. Checked from latest 2 days failure , can't see the same error again : https://search.ci.openshift.org/?search=%5C%5Bsig-cli%5C%5D+oc+explain+should+contain+proper+fields+description+for+special+types+%5C%5BSuite%3Aopenshift%2Fconformance%2Fparallel%5C%5D&maxAge=48h&context=1&type=bug%2Bjunit&name=&excludeName=&maxMatches=5&maxBytes=20971520&groupBy=job |