stp, sig-virt: Introduce the AllowWorkloadDisruption migration STP - #82
stp, sig-virt: Introduce the AllowWorkloadDisruption migration STP#82SamAlber wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
|
Note Reviews pausedIt looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the Use the following commands to manage reviews:
Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded a new Software Test Plan at ChangesAWD Migration Quality Plan
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
|
Report bugs in Issues Welcome! 🎉This pull request will be automatically processed with the following features: 🔄 Automatic Actions
📋 Available CommandsPR Status Management
Review & Approval
Testing & Validation
Cherry-pick Operations
Label Management
✅ Merge RequirementsThis PR will be automatically approved when the following conditions are met:
📊 Review ProcessApprovers and ReviewersApprovers:
Reviewers:
Available Labels
AI Features
💡 Tips
For more information, please refer to the project documentation or contact the maintainers. |
|
SiboWang1997 can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
jerry7z can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md`:
- Line 175: Update the PM approver line that currently only lists an email
("Product Manager/Owner: [Ronen Sde-Or](ronen@redhat.com)") to include the
GitHub handle per STP Section IV requirements; locate the "Product
Manager/Owner" entry in workload-disruption-migration.md and replace or augment
the email-only link with the approver's GitHub handle (e.g., include the
`@github-username` or a link to their GitHub profile) so the entry contains both
the name and GitHub handle.
- Around line 46-49: The Known Limitations section under the heading "#### **2.
Known Limitations**" currently lists s390x memory hotplug but lacks the
mandatory sign-off; add an explicit sign-off line for that limitation in the
form "*Sign-off:* [Name/Date]" or replace it with the required phrase "None —
reviewed and confirmed by [Name/Date]" if appropriate, and do the same for the
Test Limitations block referenced around lines 86-88 (ensure each listed
limitation has its own sign-off or the explicit "None — reviewed and confirmed…"
statement) so the STP sections I.2 and II.1 comply with the sign-off guideline.
- Around line 24-30: Summary: The paragraph uses internal API/field names
(allowWorkloadDisruption, MigrationPolicy, allowPostCopy) and implementation
mechanics (precopy, PostCopy, Paused) instead of user-facing behavior; rewrite
to describe only observable user experience and acceptance criteria.
Instructions: Remove all internal identifiers and implementation terms (e.g.,
allowWorkloadDisruption, MigrationPolicy, allowPostCopy, precopy, PostCopy,
Paused) and replace with plain-language descriptions of what users will see
(e.g., "migration may use more disruptive methods to ensure completion", "VM may
be briefly stunned or live state resumed on the destination", "migration will
complete even if memory is rapidly changing"); update acceptance criteria to be
product-observable (e.g., successful node drain completes, VM state visible as
paused or resumed to users, migration completes rather than failing) and apply
the same rewrite style at the other referenced locations (lines ~39, ~57, ~137).
- Around line 41-45: Convert the two items under the "Customer Use Cases"
section into user-story format (e.g., "As an admin, I want to drain a node for
maintenance so that VMs with AWD policy migrate using PostCopy or Paused mode
and resume without process loss" and "As an admin, I want to hotplug CPU/memory
to a running VM so AWD migration reflects new resources without process loss"),
and update the "Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)" section to explicitly list
and address Monitoring, Observability, UI, Documentation, Performance, Security,
and Scalability (each with a short measurable acceptance criterion or owner),
instead of deferring them to section II.3, so reviewers can clearly verify NFR
coverage.
- Around line 141-149: The Risks table in workload-disruption-migration.md is
missing the required "Other" risk category and lacks explicit sign-off details
for each risk; update the table to include a seventh row labeled "Other" with a
clear risk description and mitigation strategy, and add a "Sign-off" column (or
append sign-off cells) for every risk row containing the approver's name/role
and date (or a placeholder like "TBD by [ROLE] - YYYY-MM-DD") so each risk entry
includes Risk description, Mitigation strategy, and Sign-off; ensure you edit
the existing table header and rows (the risk table block around the Risk
Category/Test Coverage/Test Environment entries) to add these fields
consistently.
- Around line 92-107: The Test Strategy table is missing a "Scale Testing" row
and the "Upgrade Testing" row lacks an explicit statement about upgrade path
evaluation; add a new table row labeled "Scale Testing" with Description
covering scale/volume considerations and a clear Applicable (Y/N or N/A) and
Comments noting planned approach or deferred rationale, and update the existing
"Upgrade Testing" row (the cell under Description or Comments for "Upgrade
Testing") to explicitly state whether the upgrade path was evaluated or deferred
and include any mitigation/plan; locate and edit the rows named "Scale Testing"
and "Upgrade Testing" in the existing markdown table (the entries currently
titled "Upgrade Testing" and the nearby "Performance Testing") to make these
additions/clarifications.
- Around line 79-85: Replace the four TODO PM/Lead Agreement entries in the
Out-of-Scope table for the rows containing "Windows node drain", "Windows memory
hotplug", "s390x memory hotplug", and "Performance / scale testing" with a
proper "PM/Lead Agreement" value including the approver's name and date (e.g.,
"Name / YYYY-MM-DD"), and convert the table into the required itemized format by
ensuring each item has explicit Rationale and PM/Lead Agreement fields (move the
rationale text into the Rationale field and replace each TODO with the name/date
agreement), so the Out-of-Scope section meets the STP Section II.1 requirements.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 090197de-e007-45a6-80c5-dbbc6fba13a7
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md
7cb614b to
df64602
Compare
|
jerry7z can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
SiboWang1997 can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (7)
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md (7)
175-175:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorMEDIUM: PM approver entry needs GitHub handle.
Line 175 includes email only; Section IV requires reviewer/approver identity with GitHub handle.
As per coding guidelines, "STP Sign-off and Approval (Section IV) must list Reviewers with names and GitHub handles and Approvers (QE Lead, PM, Dev Lead at minimum) with no placeholder text remaining".
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` at line 175, The PM approver entry currently shows only an email ("Product Manager/Owner: [Ronen Sde-Or](rsdeor@redhat.com)"); update the Section IV approvers/reviewers list to include the PM's GitHub handle alongside their name (for example replace the email-only link with a GitHub-style reference such as "Product Manager/Owner: Ronen Sde‑Or (`@rsdeor`)" or a Markdown link to their GitHub profile), ensuring the Approvers block (QE Lead, PM, Dev Lead) contains real names and GitHub handles with no placeholder text remaining.
18-20:⚠️ Potential issue | 🔴 CriticalCRITICAL: Rewrite internal/API-centric wording into user-observable behavior only.
The STP still relies on API fields/CRD terms and internal mechanics (e.g.,
MigrationPolicy, field names, VMI status internals) across core requirement, strategy, and scenario text. This blocks approval for this repo’s STP standard.As per coding guidelines, "STPs must describe what users experience from the user perspective only — no API field names, CRD names, internal component references, or implementation mechanisms".
Also applies to: 24-30, 39-39, 42-43, 57-57, 66-66, 70-76, 88-88, 98-98, 137-137, 145-148
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` around lines 18 - 20, Rewrite the affected sections to describe only user-observable behavior and outcomes, removing all API/CRD/internal names and implementation mechanics: replace references like "AWD", "MigrationPolicy", "PostCopy", "Paused", and any mentions of VMI status internals with plain-language descriptions of what the user will see (e.g., "the VM may be briefly paused to finish transfer", "remaining memory is fetched on-demand after start on target", "a migration mode that resumes immediately once final data arrives"), and update the core requirement, strategy, and scenario paragraphs accordingly so they describe behaviors, triggers, and user-facing states rather than field names or internal components.
48-48:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 MajorHIGH: Known/Test limitations are missing mandatory sign-off lines.
Each limitation item must include explicit sign-off metadata (
*Sign-off:* [Name/Date]) or the required “None — reviewed and confirmed…” statement when applicable.As per coding guidelines, "STP Known Limitations (Section I.2) must include sign-off with
*Sign-off:* [Name/Date]for each limitation" and "STP Test Limitations (Section II.1) must each have sign-off:*Sign-off:* [Name/Date]."Also applies to: 88-88
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` at line 48, The Known Limitations and Test Limitations entries are missing the mandatory sign-off metadata; update each limitation item in "Known Limitations (Section I.2)" and "Test Limitations (Section II.1)" — including the s390x memory hotplug note (the line stating "s390x does not support maxGuest memory...") — to append a sign-off line in the exact format "*Sign-off:* [Name/Date]" or, if there truly are none, replace the absence with the required statement "None — reviewed and confirmed [Name/Date]"; ensure every listed limitation has one of these sign-offs so the document meets the STP sign-off requirements.
92-107:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 MajorHIGH: Test Strategy is still incomplete (missing Scale Testing).
The table does not include a dedicated Scale Testing entry, which is mandatory even if deferred/N/A with justification.
As per coding guidelines, "STP Test Strategy (Section II.2) must address all testing types (Functional, Automation, Regression, Performance, Scale, Security, Usability, Monitoring, Compatibility, Upgrade, Dependencies, Cross Integrations, Cloud Testing)".
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` around lines 92 - 107, Add a missing "Scale Testing" row to the test matrix table: insert a row labeled "Scale Testing" under the other test types with an Applicable (Y/N or N/A) value and a concise comment that either describes the planned scale tests (e.g., node/pod/migration concurrency, VMI counts, storage IO at scale) or justifies why scale testing is deferred/N/A for this STP; ensure the new row follows the existing table formatting and references "Scale Testing" so the STP Test Strategy (Section II.2) explicitly addresses this required testing type.
79-85:⚠️ Potential issue | 🔴 CriticalCRITICAL: Out-of-Scope section still contains TODO approvals and non-compliant structure.
PM/ Lead Agreementcannot remainTODO, and each out-of-scope item must be in the required itemized format with rationale and named/date agreement.As per coding guidelines, "STP Out of Scope items (Section II.1) must have Rationale and PM/Lead Agreement with name and date (format:
- **Item** / *Rationale:* / *PM/Lead Agreement:*)".🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` around lines 79 - 85, Replace the table under "Out-of-Scope Item" in workload-disruption-migration.md (Section II.1) so that no PM/ Lead Agreement cells contain "TODO": convert each row into the required itemized format "- **Item** / *Rationale:* / *PM/Lead Agreement:*" and fill the PM/Lead Agreement with an actual name and date (e.g., "Jane Doe, 2026-04-19") for each of the four items (Windows node drain, Windows memory hotplug, s390x memory hotplug, Performance / scale testing); ensure the rationale text from the table is preserved and that the header/table is removed or replaced so the section conforms exactly to the prescribed itemized structure.
141-149:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 MajorHIGH: Risks section missing required category and sign-off data.
The table omits the Other risk category and does not include explicit per-risk sign-off, which are both required.
As per coding guidelines, "STP Risks (Section II.5) must address ALL 7 risk categories (Timeline/Schedule, Test Coverage, Test Environment, Untestable Aspects, Resource Constraints, Dependencies, Other), even if N/A with justification" and "STP Risks must each have: Risk description, Mitigation strategy, and Sign-off."
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` around lines 141 - 149, The Risks table in STP Risks (Section II.5) is missing the required "Other" risk category and per-risk sign-off entries; update the markdown table to include a row for "Other" (even if N/A with justification) and add a Sign-off column entry for every existing row (Timeline/Schedule, Test Coverage, Test Environment, Untestable Aspects, Resource Constraints, Dependencies, and Other) so each risk has Risk description, Mitigation strategy, and Sign-off; ensure the new column values clearly indicate who signs off (or "N/A — justification") and use the same table format/pipe alignment as the existing rows.
41-44:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 MajorHIGH: Section I.1 still misses required use-case and NFR structure.
Line 41 is not in user-story format (
As a [role], I want...), and Line 44 does not explicitly and verifiably address all required NFR categories (Monitoring, Observability, UI, Documentation, Performance, Security, Scalability).As per coding guidelines, "STP Customer use cases must be in user story format ("As a [role], I want to [action]")" and "STP NFRs must explicitly address: Monitoring, Observability, UI, Documentation, Performance, Security, Scalability. NFRs not covered must have justification".
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md` around lines 41 - 44, Convert the "Customer Use Cases" entry into one or more user stories using the required format (e.g., "As an admin, I want to drain a node so that VMs with AWD policy migrate using PostCopy or Paused mode and resume without process loss"; "As an admin, I want to hotplug CPU/memory so that AWD migration preserves processes and reflects new resources in the guest"), and update the "Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)" row to explicitly list each NFR category (Monitoring, Observability, UI, Documentation, Performance, Security, Scalability) with either a short requirement or a justification why it is not applicable (for example: Monitoring: none required / justification; Observability: covered by X tests; UI: none; Documentation: covered in KubeVirt user-guide; Performance: completionTimeoutPerGiB and bandwidth caps defined for testability; Security: RBAC covered by core KubeVirt tests; Scalability: state impact limited to node-level), referencing the table headings "Customer Use Cases" and "Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)" and terms like MigrationPolicy and completionTimeoutPerGiB to keep context.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md`:
- Around line 110-122: The test-environment table contains empty cells; update
the table rows (notably the "Required Operators", "Platform", and "Special
Configurations" columns and any other blank example cells) so every cell
contains either an explicit value or "N/A", and make the "OCP & OpenShift
Virtualization Version(s)" entry explicitly state both the supported OCP version
and the OpenShift Virtualization operator version (e.g., "OCP 4.17+, OVS X.Y.Z"
or "OCP 4.17+, OpenShift Virtualization X.Y.Z"); ensure the "Specification
Examples" column entries are completed for the affected rows (Cluster Topology,
Required Operators, Platform, Special Configurations) so there are no empty
cells remaining.
---
Duplicate comments:
In `@stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md`:
- Line 175: The PM approver entry currently shows only an email ("Product
Manager/Owner: [Ronen Sde-Or](rsdeor@redhat.com)"); update the Section IV
approvers/reviewers list to include the PM's GitHub handle alongside their name
(for example replace the email-only link with a GitHub-style reference such as
"Product Manager/Owner: Ronen Sde‑Or (`@rsdeor`)" or a Markdown link to their
GitHub profile), ensuring the Approvers block (QE Lead, PM, Dev Lead) contains
real names and GitHub handles with no placeholder text remaining.
- Around line 18-20: Rewrite the affected sections to describe only
user-observable behavior and outcomes, removing all API/CRD/internal names and
implementation mechanics: replace references like "AWD", "MigrationPolicy",
"PostCopy", "Paused", and any mentions of VMI status internals with
plain-language descriptions of what the user will see (e.g., "the VM may be
briefly paused to finish transfer", "remaining memory is fetched on-demand after
start on target", "a migration mode that resumes immediately once final data
arrives"), and update the core requirement, strategy, and scenario paragraphs
accordingly so they describe behaviors, triggers, and user-facing states rather
than field names or internal components.
- Line 48: The Known Limitations and Test Limitations entries are missing the
mandatory sign-off metadata; update each limitation item in "Known Limitations
(Section I.2)" and "Test Limitations (Section II.1)" — including the s390x
memory hotplug note (the line stating "s390x does not support maxGuest
memory...") — to append a sign-off line in the exact format "*Sign-off:*
[Name/Date]" or, if there truly are none, replace the absence with the required
statement "None — reviewed and confirmed [Name/Date]"; ensure every listed
limitation has one of these sign-offs so the document meets the STP sign-off
requirements.
- Around line 92-107: Add a missing "Scale Testing" row to the test matrix
table: insert a row labeled "Scale Testing" under the other test types with an
Applicable (Y/N or N/A) value and a concise comment that either describes the
planned scale tests (e.g., node/pod/migration concurrency, VMI counts, storage
IO at scale) or justifies why scale testing is deferred/N/A for this STP; ensure
the new row follows the existing table formatting and references "Scale Testing"
so the STP Test Strategy (Section II.2) explicitly addresses this required
testing type.
- Around line 79-85: Replace the table under "Out-of-Scope Item" in
workload-disruption-migration.md (Section II.1) so that no PM/ Lead Agreement
cells contain "TODO": convert each row into the required itemized format "-
**Item** / *Rationale:* / *PM/Lead Agreement:*" and fill the PM/Lead Agreement
with an actual name and date (e.g., "Jane Doe, 2026-04-19") for each of the four
items (Windows node drain, Windows memory hotplug, s390x memory hotplug,
Performance / scale testing); ensure the rationale text from the table is
preserved and that the header/table is removed or replaced so the section
conforms exactly to the prescribed itemized structure.
- Around line 141-149: The Risks table in STP Risks (Section II.5) is missing
the required "Other" risk category and per-risk sign-off entries; update the
markdown table to include a row for "Other" (even if N/A with justification) and
add a Sign-off column entry for every existing row (Timeline/Schedule, Test
Coverage, Test Environment, Untestable Aspects, Resource Constraints,
Dependencies, and Other) so each risk has Risk description, Mitigation strategy,
and Sign-off; ensure the new column values clearly indicate who signs off (or
"N/A — justification") and use the same table format/pipe alignment as the
existing rows.
- Around line 41-44: Convert the "Customer Use Cases" entry into one or more
user stories using the required format (e.g., "As an admin, I want to drain a
node so that VMs with AWD policy migrate using PostCopy or Paused mode and
resume without process loss"; "As an admin, I want to hotplug CPU/memory so that
AWD migration preserves processes and reflects new resources in the guest"), and
update the "Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)" row to explicitly list each NFR
category (Monitoring, Observability, UI, Documentation, Performance, Security,
Scalability) with either a short requirement or a justification why it is not
applicable (for example: Monitoring: none required / justification;
Observability: covered by X tests; UI: none; Documentation: covered in KubeVirt
user-guide; Performance: completionTimeoutPerGiB and bandwidth caps defined for
testability; Security: RBAC covered by core KubeVirt tests; Scalability: state
impact limited to node-level), referencing the table headings "Customer Use
Cases" and "Non-Functional Requirements (NFRs)" and terms like MigrationPolicy
and completionTimeoutPerGiB to keep context.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
Run ID: ef2e93af-35f0-4f4f-9f48-ea1140c1d9d7
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md
df64602 to
7f3a3f4
Compare
openshift-virtualization-qe-bot-5
removed
the
changes-requested-coderabbitai[bot]
label
|
jerry7z can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
SiboWang1997 can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
7f3a3f4 to
8af640b
Compare
|
jerry7z can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
SiboWang1997 can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
8af640b to
3573a3b
Compare
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
ac7019b to
bce14af
Compare
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
1 similar comment
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
Added to known limitations: "PostCopy mode is silently suppressed for VMs with VFIO devices (host devices, GPUs, SR-IOV interfaces); AWD falls back to Paused mode instead." |
|
/approve |
mtessun
left a comment
mtessun
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Note that Windows migrations still need to be tested one way or the other.
|
/lgtm |
rnetser
left a comment
rnetser
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
Found 7 issue(s) in this PR:
💡 Suggestions (7)
| File | Line | Issue |
|---|---|---|
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
43 | The acceptance criteria only verify migration mode (PostCopy or Paused). Process |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
157 | P0 goal requires verifying both PostCopy and Paused modes, but the scenario acce |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
69 | Scope intro implies node drain is tested on both RHEL and Windows, but Out of Sc |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
157 | "Process preservation" is used in every scenario but never defined. Please clari |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
28 | Consider softening to reflect that AWD helps migration converge when pre-copy al |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
73 | Testing goals currently cover only successful AWD completion. Would it make sens |
stps/sig-virt/workload-disruption-migration.md |
41 | Customer use cases cover drain and hotplug but not explicit migration. The P0 mi |
Review generated by pi
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
/lgtm |
@SamAlber where is this gap covered? |
|
/approve cancel |
Windows migrations are in scope: II.1 Scope - AWD migration + CPU/memory hotplug are covered for both RHEL and Windows The only Windows exclusion is Windows node drain, since the AWD path during drain does not differ by guest OS. |
|
@SamAlber please ask for Martin and Lee's approval and we can merge |
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
Add Software Test Plan for the AllowWorkloadDisruption (AWD) migration feature, covering PostCopy and Paused migration modes across RHEL and Windows guests with migration, node drain, and CPU/memory hotplug triggers. Signed-off-by: Samuel Albershtein <salbersh@redhat.com> Assisted-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
Update the AWD migration STP to include HCO-to-KubeVirt configuration propagation testing. The allowWorkloadDisruption field is set via the HCO CR and must propagate to the KubeVirt CR. Signed-off-by: Samuel Albershtein <salbersh@redhat.com>
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
|
Clean rebase detected — no code changes compared to previous head ( |
|
mtessun can not be added as reviewer. Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.: 422 {"message": "Reviews may only be requested from collaborators. One or more of the users or teams you specified is not a collaborator of the RedHatQE/openshift-virtualization-tests-design-docs repository.", "documentation_url": "https://docs.github.com/rest/pulls/review-requests#request-reviewers-for-a-pull-request", "status": "422"} |
12 participants
Add Software Test Plan for the AllowWorkloadDisruption (AWD) migration feature, covering PostCopy and Paused migration modes across RHEL and Windows guests with migration, node drain, and CPU/memory hotplug triggers.
Assisted-by: Claude
Special notes for your reviewer
Summary by CodeRabbit