Skip to content

test(plugins): add Ginkgo test suite for /pkg/csi/plugins/register.go#5517

Open
adity1raut wants to merge 3 commits intofluid-cloudnative:masterfrom
adity1raut:TestingCsiPlugins3
Open

test(plugins): add Ginkgo test suite for /pkg/csi/plugins/register.go#5517
adity1raut wants to merge 3 commits intofluid-cloudnative:masterfrom
adity1raut:TestingCsiPlugins3

Conversation

@adity1raut
Copy link
Contributor

Ⅰ. Describe what this PR does

  • test(plugins): add Ginkgo test suite for plugins package

Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?

part of #5407

Ⅲ. List the added test cases (unit test/integration test) if any, please explain if no tests are needed.

Ⅳ. Describe how to verify it

Ⅴ. Special notes for reviews

Signed-off-by: adity1raut <araut7798@gmail.com>
@fluid-e2e-bot
Copy link

fluid-e2e-bot bot commented Jan 27, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign trafalgarzzz for approval by writing /assign @trafalgarzzz in a comment. For more information see:The Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

@fluid-e2e-bot
Copy link

fluid-e2e-bot bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Hi @adity1raut. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a fluid-cloudnative 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/test-infra repository.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 27, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 61.35%. Comparing base (f94acd1) to head (9bbf308).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5517      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   61.29%   61.35%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         444      444              
  Lines       30540    30540              
==========================================
+ Hits        18721    18739      +18     
+ Misses      10276    10257      -19     
- Partials     1543     1544       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@adity1raut adity1raut marked this pull request as ready for review January 28, 2026 03:31
@cheyang
Copy link
Collaborator

cheyang commented Feb 13, 2026

/gemini review

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request adds a Ginkgo test suite for pkg/csi/plugins/register.go. The changes are a good step towards improving test coverage. I've found a few issues: a package naming inconsistency that will cause a build failure, unnecessary use of reflection in a test helper, and a test case that lacks assertions. Addressing these points will improve the quality and correctness of the new tests.

Comment on lines 33 to 56
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

This function uses reflection to set fields that are actually exported. This makes the code unnecessarily complex and less performant. It can be simplified by using a struct literal for initialization.

// createTestRunningContext creates a RunningContext for testing
func createTestRunningContext(nodeID, endpoint, kubeletConfigPath string) config.RunningContext {
	return config.RunningContext{
		Config: config.Config{
			NodeId:            nodeID,
			Endpoint:          endpoint,
			KubeletConfigPath: kubeletConfigPath,
		},
	}
}

Comment on lines 121 to 132
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

medium

This test case lacks assertions. It only prints to GinkgoWriter, which doesn't verify any behavior. Based on the setup, getNodeAuthorizedClientFromKubeletConfig should succeed. You should add assertions to confirm that no error is returned and a client is created.

		It("should process the file and return a client", func() {
			// Note: This test will not fail when calling InitNodeAuthorizedClient
			// because it does not require a connection to the Kubernetes API server to create a client.
			client, err := getNodeAuthorizedClientFromKubeletConfig(kubeletConfigPath)

			Expect(err).NotTo(HaveOccurred())
			Expect(client).NotTo(BeNil())
		})

Copy link
Collaborator

@cheyang cheyang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@adity1raut pls resolve the comments by gemini first.

@adity1raut
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cheyang I am currently work on that

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

@adity1raut
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cheyang The line errors are not showing on my side. How should I approach this?

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

Comments