Skip to content

Conversation

@dgoodwin
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from sosiouxme and stbenjam August 29, 2025 17:46
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 29, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dgoodwin

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 29, 2025
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 29, 2025

@dgoodwin: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/unit ab5509a link true /test unit
ci/prow/security ab5509a link true /test security

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@neisw
Copy link
Contributor

neisw commented Aug 29, 2025

/hold

hypershift is platform:aws, topology:external which is how aks is setup, platform:azure, topology:external

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 29, 2025
{"-rosa", "rosa"}, // Keep above AWS as many ROSA jobs also mention AWS
{"-aws", "aws"},
{"-alibaba", "alibaba"},
{"-azure-aro-hcp", "aro"},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Look here for ARO, are you sure all AKS is ARO?

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.

Mark the issue as fresh by commenting /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
Exclude this issue from closing by commenting /lifecycle frozen.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 29, 2025
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 29, 2025

Walkthrough

Updated platform classification logic to recognize the -aks pattern as "aks" instead of "azure" across both the variant registry code and snapshot data, affecting platform inference for jobs containing -aks in their identifiers.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Platform mapping update
pkg/variantregistry/ocp.go, pkg/variantregistry/snapshot.yaml
Changed -aks pattern mapping from "azure" to "aks" in the setPlatform function; replaced all corresponding Platform field values in snapshot entries from "azure" to "aks" for consistency

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes

  • Verify the -aks pattern mapping change aligns with intended platform classification strategy
  • Confirm all snapshot entries were updated consistently and no partial updates were missed
  • Validate that "aks" is the correct canonical platform identifier for Azure Kubernetes Service workloads
✨ Finishing touches
  • 📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Post copyable unit tests in a comment

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting

Knowledge base: Disabled due to Reviews -> Disable Knowledge Base setting

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f58ded5 and ab5509a.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • pkg/variantregistry/ocp.go (1 hunks)
  • pkg/variantregistry/snapshot.yaml (7 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (1)
**

⚙️ CodeRabbit configuration file

-Focus on major issues impacting performance, readability, maintainability and security. Avoid nitpicks and avoid verbosity.

Files:

  • pkg/variantregistry/ocp.go
  • pkg/variantregistry/snapshot.yaml
🔇 Additional comments (1)
pkg/variantregistry/snapshot.yaml (1)

378-378: I'm unable to access the repository to complete the verification due to a clone operation failure. However, I can assess the review comment based on the context provided.

The original review comment raises a valid concern about completeness—specifically whether all -aks entries in a large snapshot file (20,000+ lines) have been updated. The comment presents 7 hunks across releases 4.19–4.21, but doesn't confirm that these represent the entire set of changes needed.

Since I cannot execute scripts to verify this concern, I'll provide the rewritten comment reflecting this limitation:


Verify that all -aks variant entries have been updated.

The PR shows 7 hunks updating Platform from "azure" to "aks" for -aks entries across releases 4.19–4.21. However, without access to search the full 20,000+ line snapshot.yaml file, I cannot confirm whether these hunks represent all -aks entries requiring updates or if any entries were missed. Please verify locally that there are no remaining -aks entries with Platform: azure by running:

rg -B 10 'Platform: azure' pkg/variantregistry/snapshot.yaml | rg '\-aks'

This should return no results if all -aks entries have been correctly updated.

Also applies to: 20464-20464, 20487-20487, 21563-21563, 21586-21586, 22161-22161, 22184-22184


{"-azure-aro-hcp", "aro"},
{"-azure", "azure"},
{"-aks", "azure"},
{"-aks", "aks"},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

⚠️ Potential issue | 🔴 Critical

Critical: Move the -aks pattern before -azure to prevent misclassification.

The -aks pattern on line 873 is checked after -azure (line 872). Since pattern matching returns on first match, jobs containing both strings (e.g., periodic-ci-openshift-hypershift-...-e2e-azure-aks-... as seen on line 680) will match -azure first and be incorrectly categorized as "azure" instead of "aks". This defeats the purpose of this PR.

Apply this diff to fix the ordering:

 		{"-azure-aro-hcp", "aro"},
-		{"-azure", "azure"},
 		{"-aks", "aks"},
+		{"-azure", "azure"},

This follows the same pattern as -rosa being checked before -aws (lines 868-869) and -azure-aro-hcp before -azure (lines 871-872).

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change
{"-aks", "aks"},
{"-azure-aro-hcp", "aro"},
{"-aks", "aks"},
{"-azure", "azure"},
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
In pkg/variantregistry/ocp.go around line 873, the "-aks" pattern is currently
listed after "-azure" causing jobs that contain both to be misclassified as
"azure"; move the {"-aks", "aks"} entry to appear before the {"-azure", "azure"}
entry so "-aks" is checked first, keeping the existing list formatting and
ordering conventions (similar to how "-rosa" precedes "-aws" and
"-azure-aro-hcp" precedes "-azure").

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants