Change:
import ( "fmt" <ins> "strings" </ins> "time" . "github.com/onsi/ginkgo"

Discussion:
<!-- Please use this template while reporting a bug and provide as much info as possible. Not doing so may result in your bug not being addressed in a timely manner. Thanks!--What happened: Probably caused by <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --/kind bug
https://k8s- /assign
I understand that moved crd creation logic to e2e test's k8s cluster deployment code. On the other hand, I tested it with manually deployed k8s cluster. So, in my case, I guess that in addition to enable and feature gates enabled, I need to create crd manually before tests, like below: I could make two of three SkipAttach tests pass in my environment by above way. For "non-attachable volume does not need VolumeAttachment" case, I'm still looking into it. (It doesn't seem to skip creating volumeAttachment, properly)
I found a typo in 's argument. While hostpath driver's connects driver name and unique name without "-", it connects them with "-". This makes "non-attachable" test fail, due to the mismatch between volume name in crd and provisioner name, as a result, creating volumeAttachment isn't skipped. I will create a PR to fix it. For above bug, is unrelated. It just changed the way in how to test in manually deployed k8s cluster as I mentioned in above comment. So, there should be no problem for the PR, at least for the CI testing if it works well in CI environments.
I can verify that the CRDs are not getting installed on the alpha cluster. Investigating why.
/reopen since I see the Alpha tests failing
/milestone v1.13 /priority important-soon /kind failing-tests
/kind failing-test
/reopen
Reopened this issue. <detailsIn response to : /reopen Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
I don't think this is fully resolved. There are still failures on https://k8s- /reopen
Reopened this issue. <detailsIn response to : I don't think this is fully resolved. There are still failures on https://k8s- Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available .

If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
can you help take a look at these failures? It's testing CSI filesystem volume mode. I think it is unrelated to the crd installation issue that Saad fixed.
I tested with AllAlpha flag and manually created csi crds and confirmed that filesystem volume mode test passed in my environment and also other tests passed there. If I delete csi crds, other tests also fail, so I agree that the issue that Saad fixed is not related. However, above also means that this issue can't be reproduced in my environment.
I1109 14:56:01.141] Nov 9 14:56:01.131: INFO: At 2018-11-09 14:50:54 +0000 UTC - event for security-context--e42e-11e8-9b95-: {attachdetach-controller } FailedAttachVolume: AttachVolume.Attach failed for volume "pvc--e42e-11e8-880b-" : node "bootstrap-e2e-minion-group-3wtg" has no NodeID annotation
Hostpath also seems to be failing because of driver registration issues? Not sure why other alpha tests are passing if that's the case
This test is the only test that uses  to create pod with CSI driver volume and expects the result to be success. One of the pod parameters specified there might affect this failure.
Those 2 failing tests are newly introduced in and started to fail from the beginning. Is that PR blocking 1.13? If not, can we revert and fix later? I have recently set up optional presubmit tests for alpha features at , which will pick up those 2 tests. Currently this failure is blocking
apart from the 2 failing tests, I see which addressed with is also flaky. These failures are now blocking PRs as mentioned above. As we enter code slush today, its very critical to have the PRs get in sooner than later. Can we plz revert the feature and the tests until they are fully resolved and ready to go. Thanks
I prefer disabling the specific tests instead of reverting the entire pr. We will lose important signal for csi
That works for me.

Can you cc me on the PR that disables those tests? When you re-enable the tests, remember to try them out on . :)
Let me consider if we can just skip these test for CSI, instead of reverting the entire patch.
you mean just skipping them in Alpha cluster right?
I was thinking about skipping the below test with the combination of below drivers: [Test] [Testpattern: Dynamic PV (filesystem volmode)] volumeMode[Feature:BlockVolume] should create sc, pod, pv, and pvc, read/write to the pv, and delete all created resources [Driver] csi-hostpath Won't it enough? Or, do we need to skip it only with alpha cluster?
If we just disable the tests alone and not revert the feature, we are just masking the issue. Ideally if we are not able to fix the tests and reenable them the feature should be reverted from 1.13 as well. Are you also actively working on fixing the tests and this skip is just to unblock PRs in the meantime? if so can we timebox by when we can have the tests fixed and re-enabled / the feature reverted? My fear is we might forget the fact that its disabled since there's no active reporting on it.
Actually, there is no feature in either of culprit commits. It tests or intended to improve the way it is tested. Therefore, it must be a test issue or another issue which is found by the test , not an issue introduced by the commits themselves. In the code, there is a clear comment that the test is skipped due to this issue with the reference to this issue#, so this won't be forgot. If you still worry about this issue is not tracked, we might be able to keep this issue open.
IIUC the test that were failing (and are being reverted) were for the new CSI festures going to Alpha in 1.13, right? so even these 2 culprit commits do not contain feature work, it is testing some new code additions to 1.13 and now those will be untested until we re-enable these tests. Is there an ETA to re-enable them, preferably sometime early next week? Yes +1 to keeping this issue open to track the skipped tests.
The two failing tests themselves are not for new alpha features that are in v1.13.

Instead, they are just to test csi driver works well as it works in existing in-tree driver. (And failed because they might be affected by some other alpha features or some of specific configurations in gce.) In addition, ~50 tests for csi driver, so it would be better not to remove all of the tests by reverting the PR, just for the 2 failing tests. I think that just reverting the patch won't help improving quality of k8s. As for ETA to solve the issue, I found difficulty in debuging in my local environment. It seems that the two tests fail in gce environment w/ AllAlpha=true, however, as I've already mentioned, at least csi-hostpath tests in my local environment w/ AllAlpha=true doesn't fail.(And I don't have test environment for gce.) Of course, I will help solving the issue next week. However, I will need someone's help for testing combinations of alpha features in gce environment to narrow down which flag really affects this issue. At least I would like to know the results: w/ MountPropagation=true,CSIPersistentVolume=true,BlockVolume=true,CSIBlockVolume=true all alpha flags except CSIDriverRegistry and CSINodeInfo
/reopen Thanks for the detailed explanation. I think the revert is fine in this case then. I am keeping this issue open however to track and fix the failures in these 2 tests can any of you help answer w.r.t alpha features on gce environment. thanks
Reopened this issue. <detailsIn response to : /reopen Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
I can help debug when I'm back on Tuesday. In the meantime, I would suggest looking through the failing test logs to try to triage what's going on
Here's one failing run:
I looked into the csi-hostpath failure log. As seen in the for , where the pod which has a csi-hostpath volume is being attached is scheduled, mount volume fails with these errors (1). Related code to this log is (2), so the driver doesn't seem to be registered to . As for the registration code for csiDriver, it is called as (3).

Therefore, will be logged if the driver is triggered for registration. As seen (4), registration is only triggered in , which is different from the one the pod is scheduled. In addition, driver-registrar seems to be deployed only on the node where registration is triggered (5). Is it right behaviour, while registrar is deployed as daemonset? I guess that just this fact seems to cause an issue to make csi-hostpath driver work properly. (Actually, I only tested with 1 node environment, so this might only happen in multiple nodes environment.) <details- (1) (2) Result of grep to check whether registrar is deployed to each node [ for bootstrap-e2e-minion-group-50r7][ for bootstrap-e2e-minion-group-k781][ for bootstrap-e2e-minion-group-z5cg] </details
The hostpath plugin should be deployed as a DaemonSet, so it's strange that it's only getting registered on only one node.
/assign looking into this as well
could you link the PR for skipping [external-gcepd] tests into this issue when you do that as well
skipping gcePD-external is here:
Since gce-cos-alphafeatures is now passing, do we need to keep this issue open? Should it morph into a non-blocking issue for longterm work on a better test?
We have root caused 2 of the 3 failures, which were problems in the test and test conifg. Fixes will be out soon. Still triaging the 3rd failure, which could be a real bug in alpha clusters
I've root caused csi-hostpath failure issue. It just failed to set the node properly in test code side. I will make a PR to fix it.
Or should it be done in your PR too, to avoid modifying twice in the separate PR? Actually, the fix are as below: (Failing to set node before pod creation)
Created for csi-hostpath fix, to prepare for the case that we need a separate PR. We can discuss more on this there, if needed.
/unassign found possible root cause for GCE issue: CSI NodeID annotation is not present on the Node object, could be caused by failed retries on updating Node object.

(apparently when alpha features are open we shouldn't be looking at the Node object anyway except we seem to be, so that might also be a bug). has the most context for the fix /assign
The symptom of the remaining test failure is the test pod fails to create because it fails to attach with the error: . The test succeeds the first time it's run in a cluster, and always fails after that. Two issues caused this error message. the CSI external-attacher tries to fetch the object to get the NodeID, it does so through an informer. The first time the test is run, objects are created for the very first time, and the informer returns the correct object. In subsequent test runs, s from the first run is kept, and for some reason the informer fails to detect the object and returns empty. Making the API call directly works, I'll patch the external-provisioner with this to mitigate the issue, and this is sufficient to get the test to pass. The informer bug will need to be eventually fixed. fails to post the NodeID annotation sometimes, likely due to node status patch not being retried correctly. This is crucial for clusters without feature flag set, and this is the default for 1.13. Will add the appropriate retry mechanism.
Opened to track the informer issue
Are and potential PR for the only 2 fixes being actively worked on for this issue?
Only is needed. We have a workaround for
will you have a followup PR to enable the CSI alpha tests back? or is that already in flight?
also reenables the tests
OK with merged we should see the CSI alpha tests re-enable. to keep an eye out for CI signal
The tests got reenabled 5 days ago, and alpha tests are passing. Closing this issue. Thanks everyone for your rapid turnaround! /close
Closing this issue. <detailsIn response to : The tests got reenabled 5 days ago, and alpha tests are passing. Closing this issue. Thanks everyone for your rapid turnaround! Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available . If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the repository. </details
The tests are actually running (and passing) in the normal suite now, now that the raw block feature moved to beta.