Change:
Test: Reason for failure: The test fails if there already exists some condition in the service's status. The test patches the service appending the test condtition to existing conditions but while checking seems to never go past the first condition (L3490 below). The status field in a case where the test fails: Relevant SIG(s): /sig network
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the label and provide further guidance. The label can be by org members by writing in a comment. <detailsInstructions 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
what conditions is ? Where did you find these error? is this in a existing CI job?
This is not from a CI job, but from tests run on a local cluster with ACI-CNI, which sets the conditions for LoadBalancer services.
/sig testing
sig testing does not own tests :) each sig owns its own tests, in this case is sig network /remove-sig testing I think your analysis is correct, the test should iterate over the other conditions , I think that something like this will do it, but it will be nice to test it this seems a good opportunity to contribute /help
This request has been marked as needing help from a contributor. Please ensure that the issue body includes answers to the following questions: Why are we solving this issue? To address this issue, are there any code changes? If there are code changes, what needs to be done in the code and what places can the assignee treat as reference points? Does this issue have zero to low barrier of entry? How can the assignee reach out to you for help? For more details on the requirements of such an issue, please see and ensure that they are met. If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed by commenting with the command. <detailsIn response to : /sig testing 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
/assign

Discussion:
svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace == ns && svc.Annotations["patchedstatus"] == "true" if !found { <del> framework.Logf("Observed Service %v in namespace %v with annotations: %v & Conditions: %v", svc.ObjectMeta.Name, svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace, svc.Annotations, svc.Status.LoadBalancer) </del> <ins> framework.Logf("Observed Service %v in namespace %v with annotations: %v & Conditions: %v", svc.ObjectMeta.Name, svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace, svc.Annotations, svc.Status.Conditions) </ins> return false, nil } for _, cond := range svc.Status.Conditions {

cond.Message == "Set from e2e test" { framework.Logf("Found Service %v in namespace %v with annotations: %v & Conditions: %v", svc.ObjectMeta.Name, svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace, svc.Annotations, svc.Status.Conditions) return found, nil <del> } else { framework.Logf("Observed Service %v in namespace %v with annotations: %v & Conditions: %v", svc.ObjectMeta.Name, svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace, svc.Annotations, svc.Status.LoadBalancer) return false, nil </del> } } <ins> framework.Logf("Observed Service %v in namespace %v with annotations: %v & Conditions: %v", svc.ObjectMeta.Name, svc.ObjectMeta.Namespace, svc.Annotations, svc.Status.Conditions) return false, nil </ins> } framework.Logf("Observed event: %+v", event.Object) return false, nil