Fix 'occured' -> 'occurred' typos across e2e tests and monitors (8 files, 31 instances)#31026
Fix 'occured' -> 'occurred' typos across e2e tests and monitors (8 files, 31 instances)#31026SAY-5 wants to merge 8 commits intoopenshift:mainfrom
Conversation
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SAY-5 <SAY-5@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Pipeline controller notification For optional jobs, comment This repository is configured in: automatic mode |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
needs-ok-to-test
|
Hi @SAY-5. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step. Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: SAY-5 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
WalkthroughCorrected spelling of "occured" to "occurred" in log messages and test assertion failure messages across monitoring and testing files. No functional behavior, control flow, or logic was modified. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 9 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (9 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ 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 |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
test/extended/machine_config/helpers.go (1)
606-611:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟡 MinorOne typo still remains in this same error path.
You fixed Line 606, but Line 610 still says
"occured".Suggested patch
- framework.Logf("A timeout occured waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v.", mcnName, conditionType, status) + framework.Logf("A timeout occurred waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v.", mcnName, conditionType, status)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@test/extended/machine_config/helpers.go` around lines 606 - 611, Fix the remaining typo in the timeout log message: locate the logging call that uses framework.Logf with the message "A timeout occured waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v." (the call that references mcnName, conditionType, status and returns conditionMet,nil) and change "occured" to the correct spelling "occurred" so the log reads "A timeout occurred waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v."
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@test/extended/machine_config/machine_config_node.go`:
- Around line 378-382: The assertions after calling WaitForMCNConditionStatus
are checking for Uncordoned=True but their failure messages still refer to
UpdateComplete=True; update the two messages to match the actual condition being
waited on: when calling WaitForMCNConditionStatus(clientSet, updatingNodeName,
mcfgv1.MachineConfigNodeUpdateUncordoned, metav1.ConditionTrue, ...), change the
fmt.Sprintf error text and the o.Expect(...).To(o.BeTrue(), ...) message so they
mention "Uncordoned=True" (or similar clear text) instead of
"UpdateComplete=True" to avoid misleading failures.
In `@test/extended/machine_config/pinnedimages.go`:
- Around line 499-500: The test contains a typo "occured" in a nearby comment;
update the comment(s) that mention the error message to use the correct spelling
"occurred" (search for the string "occured" around the o.Expect(...) assertions
in pinnedimages.go, including the occurrences near the
o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(...)) line and the lines around the
PinnedImageSetsDegraded=True check) so all comments consistently read
"occurred".
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@test/extended/machine_config/helpers.go`:
- Around line 606-611: Fix the remaining typo in the timeout log message: locate
the logging call that uses framework.Logf with the message "A timeout occured
waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v." (the call that references
mcnName, conditionType, status and returns conditionMet,nil) and change
"occured" to the correct spelling "occurred" so the log reads "A timeout
occurred waiting for MCN '%v' %v condition was not %v."
🪄 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: Repository: openshift/coderabbit/.coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 7bdb1cc5-5f77-4c69-963c-49df563b90c9
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
pkg/monitortests/monitoring/statefulsetsrecreation/monitortest.gotest/extended/kernel/kernel_rt_functional.gotest/extended/kernel/kernel_rt_latency.gotest/extended/machine_config/helpers.gotest/extended/machine_config/machine_config_node.gotest/extended/machine_config/pinnedimages.go
| framework.Logf("Waiting for Uncordoned=True") | ||
| conditionMet, err = WaitForMCNConditionStatus(clientSet, updatingNodeName, mcfgv1.MachineConfigNodeUpdateUncordoned, metav1.ConditionTrue, 10*time.Second, 1*time.Second) | ||
| o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), fmt.Sprintf("Error occured while waiting for UpdateComplete=True: %v", err)) | ||
| o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), fmt.Sprintf("Error occurred while waiting for UpdateComplete=True: %v", err)) | ||
| o.Expect(conditionMet).To(o.BeTrue(), "Error, could not detect UpdateComplete=True.") | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assertion message mismatches the condition being validated.
At Line 379 you wait for Uncordoned=True, but Lines 380-381 still say UpdateComplete=True. This makes failures misleading.
Suggested patch
- o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), fmt.Sprintf("Error occurred while waiting for UpdateComplete=True: %v", err))
- o.Expect(conditionMet).To(o.BeTrue(), "Error, could not detect UpdateComplete=True.")
+ o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), fmt.Sprintf("Error occurred while waiting for Uncordoned=True: %v", err))
+ o.Expect(conditionMet).To(o.BeTrue(), "Error, could not detect Uncordoned=True.")🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@test/extended/machine_config/machine_config_node.go` around lines 378 - 382,
The assertions after calling WaitForMCNConditionStatus are checking for
Uncordoned=True but their failure messages still refer to UpdateComplete=True;
update the two messages to match the actual condition being waited on: when
calling WaitForMCNConditionStatus(clientSet, updatingNodeName,
mcfgv1.MachineConfigNodeUpdateUncordoned, metav1.ConditionTrue, ...), change the
fmt.Sprintf error text and the o.Expect(...).To(o.BeTrue(), ...) message so they
mention "Uncordoned=True" (or similar clear text) instead of
"UpdateComplete=True" to avoid misleading failures.
| o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), fmt.Sprintf("Error occurred while waiting for PinnedImageSetsDegraded=True: %v", err)) | ||
| o.Expect(conditionMet).To(o.BeTrue(), "Error, could not detect PinnedImageSetsDegraded=True.") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor consistency follow-up: nearby comment still has a typo.
Line 499 is fixed, but Line 518 still says "occured" in the comment.
Suggested patch
- // If we make it here, it means no fatal or non-fatal error has occured & the PIS application conditions were met
+ // If we make it here, it means no fatal or non-fatal error has occurred & the PIS application conditions were metAlso applies to: 518-519
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@test/extended/machine_config/pinnedimages.go` around lines 499 - 500, The
test contains a typo "occured" in a nearby comment; update the comment(s) that
mention the error message to use the correct spelling "occurred" (search for the
string "occured" around the o.Expect(...) assertions in pinnedimages.go,
including the occurrences near the o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(...)) line
and the lines around the PinnedImageSetsDegraded=True check) so all comments
consistently read "occurred".
1 participant
Fix 31 instances of `occured` → `occurred` across 8 test/monitor files.
Files
All are in Gomega assertion failure-messages (`o.Expect(err).NotTo(o.HaveOccurred(), "Error occured while ...")`) or similar. String-literal-only change; no behavior change.
Note: the Gomega `HaveOccurred` matcher (already correctly double-R) is untouched — only the human-readable error messages are corrected.
Summary by CodeRabbit