CMP-3805: Add test for configurable access modes and Storage class (34928) by taimurhafeez · Pull Request #999 · ComplianceAsCode/compliance-operator

taimurhafeez · 2025-11-25T15:15:38Z

Add an e2e test to verify that storage class and access modes are configurable via the ComplianceSuite and ComplianceScan specifications.

To implement this PR:

Run
make e2e-parallel E2E_GO_TEST_FLAGS="-v -run TestScanWithCustomStorageClass"

Expected result on OCP 4.21:

=== RUN   TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
=== PAUSE TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
=== CONT  TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
2026/03/02 14:33:22 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:27 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:32 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:37 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:42 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:47 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:52 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:57 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:02 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:07 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:12 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:17 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:22 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:32 ComplianceScan ready (DONE)
2026/03/02 14:34:32 All scans in ComplianceSuite have finished (test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite)
2026/03/02 14:34:32 Successfully verified PVC test-scan-with-custom-storage-class has storageClassName=test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-gold and accessModes=[ReadWriteOnce]
    main_test.go:5393: Successfully verified scan test-scan-with-custom-storage-class has custom storage configuration
--- PASS: TestScanWithCustomStorageClass (75.85s)
PASS

…4928)

openshift-ci-robot · 2025-11-25T15:15:43Z

@taimurhafeez: This pull request references CMP-3805 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.21.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

To implement this PR:
One of the below is needed, or there will be an error creating Machine Config Pool e2e-invalid:

The following line needs to be commented in tests/e2e/framework/main_entry.go
line to be commented --> return fmt.Errorf("failed to create Machine Config Pool %s: %w", "e2e-invalid", err)

Use CMP-3930: Include the required selectors to machineconfig to pass the ValidatingAdmissionPolicy #960

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

openshift-ci · 2025-11-25T15:15:50Z

Hi @taimurhafeez. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a github.com member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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.

rhmdnd · 2025-12-01T19:06:05Z

tests/e2e/framework/main_entry.go

 	}
 	err = f.createInvalidMachineConfigPool("e2e-invalid")
 	if err != nil {
+		// log.Printf("continuing without invalid MachineConfigPool (cluster may have ValidatingAdmissionPolicy)")


I think this breaking because Printf expects a formatting directive that we're not supplying (e.g., %s).

Something like this might help:

name := "e2e-invalid" err = f.createInvalidMachineConfigPool("e2e-invalid") if err != nil { log.Printf("failed to create %s MachineConfigPool: %s", name, err) }

comment has been removed.

rhmdnd · 2025-12-01T19:06:54Z

tests/e2e/parallel/main_test.go

 	}
 }
+
+// TestScanWithCustomStorageClass tests OCP-34928


I asked this in the other review, but do we want to keep the downstream test IDs (OCP-34928)?

has been removed.

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go

tests/e2e/parallel/main_test.go

rhmdnd · 2025-12-08T17:50:29Z

tests/e2e/parallel/main_test.go

+	// Get the default storage class provisioner for our custom storage class
+	defaultProvisioner, err := f.GetDefaultStorageClassProvisioner()
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatalf("failed to get default storage class provisioner: %s", err)


Could this technically be considered a reason to skip this test?

@rhmdnd After discussing with Xiaojie, I have modified the test case.

rhmdnd

Looks good - just one comment on if we want to consider skipping this test if the default storage class doesn't exist.

Otherwise this seems ready.

rhmdnd · 2025-12-10T15:55:06Z

/lgtm

rhmdnd

A couple of comments but primarily want to make sure we safely handle the unstructured error and bubble that up accordingly. Otherwise this looks good to me.

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go

rhmdnd · 2026-02-27T21:55:50Z

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go

+				break
+			}
+		}
+		// Alternative: check if the PVC name contains our scan name


This might not be necessary since the label should always map to the scan name (a containment check on strings will be more fragile than checking an exact match).

https://github.com/ComplianceAsCode/compliance-operator/blob/master/pkg/controller/compliancescan/rawresults.go#L80

If one scan is named foo and the other is foobar, depending on the order they're returned, it's possible this would return the wrong PVC, wouldn't it?

openshift-ci · 2026-02-27T21:56:53Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: taimurhafeez

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~~ [taimurhafeez]

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

openshift-ci-robot · 2026-03-02T14:37:02Z

@taimurhafeez: This pull request references CMP-3805 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the story to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

To implement this PR:

Run
make e2e-parallel E2E_GO_TEST_FLAGS="-v -run TestScanWithCustomStorageClass"

Expected result on OCP 4.21:

=== RUN   TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
=== PAUSE TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
=== CONT  TestScanWithCustomStorageClass
2026/03/02 14:33:22 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:27 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:32 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:37 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:42 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:47 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:52 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:33:57 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:02 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:07 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: RUNNING
2026/03/02 14:34:12 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:17 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:22 waiting until suite test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite reaches target status 'DONE'. Current status: AGGREGATING
2026/03/02 14:34:32 ComplianceScan ready (DONE)
2026/03/02 14:34:32 All scans in ComplianceSuite have finished (test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-suite)
2026/03/02 14:34:32 Successfully verified PVC test-scan-with-custom-storage-class has storageClassName=test-scan-with-custom-storage-class-gold and accessModes=[ReadWriteOnce]
   main_test.go:5393: Successfully verified scan test-scan-with-custom-storage-class has custom storage configuration
--- PASS: TestScanWithCustomStorageClass (75.85s)
PASS

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

SetNestedField can return an error if it fails to set the field properly. This change updates CreateCustomStorageClass to check and return that error so tests can fail or skip appropriately rather than silently continuing with an incomplete StorageClass object.

github-actions · 2026-03-02T14:46:17Z

🤖 To deploy this PR, run the following command:

make catalog-deploy CATALOG_IMG=ghcr.io/complianceascode/compliance-operator-catalog:999-3a52dbb2314fa6b2188b4e3929e270ef703a52e8

rhmdnd · 2026-03-02T17:10:35Z

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go

+				break
+			}
+		}
+		// Alternative: check if the PVC name contains our scan name


If one scan is named foo and the other is foobar, depending on the order they're returned, it's possible this would return the wrong PVC, wouldn't it?

openshift-ci · 2026-03-02T18:16:48Z

@taimurhafeez: 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/e2e-rosa	`3a52dbb`	link	true	`/test e2e-rosa`
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial-arm	`3a52dbb`	link	true	`/test e2e-aws-serial-arm`
ci/prow/e2e-aws-serial	`3a52dbb`	link	true	`/test e2e-aws-serial`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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.

CMP-3805: Add test for configurable access modes and Storage class (3…

ac4c9c0

…4928)

openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference label Nov 25, 2025

openshift-ci bot requested a review from jhrozek November 25, 2025 15:15

openshift-ci bot requested a review from yuumasato November 25, 2025 15:15

openshift-ci bot added the needs-ok-to-test label Nov 25, 2025

rhmdnd added the ok-to-test label Dec 1, 2025

rhmdnd reviewed Dec 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go Show resolved Hide resolved

rhmdnd reviewed Dec 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/e2e/framework/utils.go Show resolved Hide resolved

rhmdnd reviewed Dec 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/e2e/parallel/main_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rhmdnd removed the needs-ok-to-test label Dec 1, 2025

removed ID,deleted comment line, added storageClassName in logs

bb2a082

rhmdnd reviewed Dec 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

rhmdnd approved these changes Dec 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned rhmdnd Dec 8, 2025

openshift-ci bot added lgtm approved labels Dec 8, 2025

modified test from fatal to skip when there is no storage class exists

f294849

openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Dec 9, 2025

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label Dec 10, 2025

rhmdnd added this to the 1.9.0 milestone Feb 27, 2026

rhmdnd requested changes Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Feb 27, 2026

Merge branch 'master' into add-test-34928

e171126

rhmdnd requested changes Mar 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

taimurhafeez commented Nov 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Nov 25, 2025

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

taimurhafeez Dec 2, 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!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rhmdnd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rhmdnd commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

rhmdnd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

taimurhafeez commented Nov 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

taimurhafeez Dec 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading