Skip to content

Conversation

@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator

@Tal-or Tal-or commented Nov 17, 2025

There were several cases from customers related to issues with selinux lately. We want to minimize asking the customer to provide additional information in this context, so let's collect the selinux data as part of NROP MG.

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak titzhak@redhat.com

@Tal-or Tal-or requested review from ffromani and shajmakh November 17, 2025 11:30
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 17, 2025
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link

Important

Installation incomplete: to start using Gemini Code Assist, please ask the organization owner(s) to visit the Gemini Code Assist Admin Console and sign the Terms of Services.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 17, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Tal-or

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:

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 Nov 17, 2025
@Tal-or Tal-or force-pushed the mg_fetch_selinux_label branch 4 times, most recently from 0ed4ea5 to 8b7af08 Compare November 24, 2025 10:03
@Tal-or Tal-or changed the title WIP: must-gather: collect selinux info must-gather: collect selinux info Nov 24, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 24, 2025
@Tal-or Tal-or force-pushed the mg_fetch_selinux_label branch from c6c9292 to 84bd461 Compare November 27, 2025 08:56
Copy link
Member

@ffromani ffromani left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ack about the general direction

There were several cases from customers related to issues with selinux lately.
We want to minimize asking the customer to provide additional
information in this context, so let's collect the selinux data as part of NROP MG.

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
@Tal-or Tal-or force-pushed the mg_fetch_selinux_label branch from 84bd461 to 0264f99 Compare December 14, 2025 11:03
add an e2e to validate script collection format and collected data integrety.

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
@Tal-or Tal-or force-pushed the mg_fetch_selinux_label branch from 0264f99 to 72d9e43 Compare December 14, 2025 11:57

// Check that the type field contains kubelet_var_lib_t
contextType := context["type"]
Expect(contextType).To(Equal("kubelet_var_lib_t"), "kubelet.sock should have kubelet_var_lib_t SELinux context type, got: %s", contextType)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is for 4.18+ (right?), the test like this will run d/s on all versions, and will fail. we can either mark this with a new label and d/s will adapt accordingly and run it only where supported (see https://github.com/openshift-kni/numaresources-operator/blob/main/internal/api/features/_topics.json)
Or if you want to backport for better debugging for older versions, then you need to update this version of the test to handle the old expected type too.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch I'll update the test accordingly

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@shajmakh Thinking about it again, are must gather test are part of the serial suite where same tests are running against all releases?

If so, and we want this test to run on 4.18+ we need to backport from 4.22->4.18, do we want that?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

these tests runs also in d/s, so yes, we use the same test image for all releases. But also these tests run u/s via prow, so if we want to backport the data collection support to older versions, we need to have the test changes also backported so we can have coverage u/s.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For now I added skip if version < 4.22, for every backport I'll decrease the minimum version.

@shajmakh
Copy link
Member

/test ci-install-e2e-compact

@Tal-or
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Tal-or commented Dec 28, 2025

/retest

We don't want this test to run on older versions because
we don't have the selinux data in older MG releases, which means
the test is gonna failed.

Signed-off-by: Talor Itzhak <titzhak@redhat.com>
@Tal-or Tal-or force-pushed the mg_fetch_selinux_label branch from 0f425cd to c608346 Compare December 30, 2025 08:02
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.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants