Repository navigation
Conversation
sp16743
changed the title
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
suryag1201
reviewed
Sep 17, 2026
sp16743
marked this pull request as draft
September 21, 2026 09:56
sp16743
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 21, 2026 10:05
sp16743
force-pushed
the
automation/CSTACKEX-286
branch
from
September 21, 2026 10:21
ca893c1 to
07916ec
Compare
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.74% |
| Branch coverage | 18.87% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
sandeeplocharla
left a comment
sandeeplocharla
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do add host level checks to confirm resize seen from the host side also.
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
sp16743
force-pushed
the
automation/CSTACKEX-286
branch
from
October 5, 2026 09:42
1b68a98 to
1ce7ad9
Compare
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.73% |
| Branch coverage | 18.86% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
sandeeplocharla
approved these changes
Oct 8, 2026
suryag1201
reviewed
Oct 15, 2026
suryag1201
reviewed
Oct 15, 2026
| 07 Create a new pool and allocate a CloudStack data volume (LUN created) | ||
| 08 Delete the volume (LUN removed), enter maintenance, force-delete pool | ||
| 02 Increase storage pool capacity to the maximum supported size | ||
| 03 Reject a grow beyond the maximum supported size |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Grow and shrink a zone-scoped pool, on both protocols.
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The behaviour of storage pool resize is the same for zone and cluster scoped pool. Should I still add grow and shrink of pool in zone scoped pool if needed?
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
…ive VMs are present, when pool is in maintenance.
Pool lifecycle (both NFS3 and iSCSI), now 15 tests:
- test_03 rejects a grow past the 300 TiB ONTAP FlexVol maximum,
asserting ONTAP's autosize-maximum error.
- test_12 deploys a VM and attaches the volume.
- test_14 grows and shrinks the pool while the VM holds the volume,
checking the VM stays running and keeps the volume
Zone-scoped pool (both protocols), now 6 tests:
- test_02 and test_03 grow and safely shrink the pool, verifying the
export policy (NFS3) and igroups (iSCSI) are present after resize.
sp16743
force-pushed
the
automation/CSTACKEX-286
branch
from
October 16, 2026 13:47
1ce7ad9 to
9e27bfc
Compare
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 25.77% |
| Branch coverage | 20.05% |
Grade Scale
| Grade | Line Coverage | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 🟢 A | ≥ 80% | Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴 |
| 🟡 B | 60-79% | Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉 |
| 🟠 C | 40-59% | Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬 |
| 🔴 D | 20-39% | Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖 |
| ⛔ F | < 20% | Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥 |
Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR...
Automation test coverage for ONTAP primary storage pool resize on both NFS3 and iSCSI, covering grow, safe shrink, and reject-when-used-space-would-be-exceeded.
1.test_02_grow_storage_pool — grow the empty pool by ONTAP_MIN_VOLUME_SIZE, then poll until CloudStack capacitybytes and ONTAP FlexVol space.size match the request and the pool stays Up (NFS export policy / iSCSI igroups unchanged).
2.test_03_shrink_storage_pool — shrink back to the original size and assert the same CloudStack + ONTAP convergence.
3.test_10_reject_shrink_below_used_capacity — after a new pool + volume, attempt a shrink below ONTAP used space (target kept above the 20 MiB FlexVol minimum). Expect CloudstackAPIException; volume, pool capacity, and protocol objects stay unchanged.
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?
What was verified:
Pool lifecycle — NFS3 and iSCSI
1.test_02_grow_storage_pool
Grow pool to the 300 TiB ONTAP limit.
Verify CloudStack and FlexVol capacities match.
2.test_03_reject_grow_above_max_size
Reject growth to 300 TiB + 1 GiB.
Verify capacity and protocol resources remain unchanged.
3.test_04_shrink_storage_pool
Safely shrink the pool to its original size.
4.test_08_resize_storage_pool_in_maintenance
Resize while the pool is in maintenance mode.
5.test_13_reject_shrink_below_used_capacity
Reject shrinking below actual used space without affecting existing resources.
6.test_14_resize_pool_with_vm_attached
Resize while a volume is attached to a running VM.
Verify attachment, export policy/LUN, and pool state remain intact.
Zone-scoped pool — NFS3 and iSCSI
1.test_02_grow_zone_scoped_pool
Grow a zone-scoped pool.
Verify CloudStack capacity and ONTAP FlexVol size increase.
Confirm the pool remains Up and protocol resources are preserved.
2.test_03_shrink_zone_scoped_pool
Shrink the zone-scoped pool to its original size.
Verify CloudStack and ONTAP capacities match.
Confirm the pool remains Up and protocol resources are preserved.
Environment:
CloudStack management server with the NetApp ONTAP plugin deployed (integration API on port 8096)
KVM cluster from test/integration/plugins/ontap/ontap.cfg
ONTAP SVM with NFS3 and iSCSI enabled, at least one data LIF per protocol
Tests executed from the repo root using the ONTAP Marvin venv (setup_env.sh)
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?