GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — Automation tests for Compute to Compute with Storage VM migration and Storage migration by sandeeplocharla · Pull Request #113 · NetApp/cloudstack Conversation
|
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
1dc3a55 to
424eca6
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
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
424eca6 to
6261970
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
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
6261970 to
d90249e
Compare
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 24.84% |
| Branch coverage | 19.00% |
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
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
d90249e to
157fa7d
Compare
github-actions
Bot
commented
Oct 16, 2026
•
edited
Loading
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
🔴 Test Coverage Grade:
|
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Line coverage | 25.82% |
| Branch coverage | 20.11% |
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
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch. |
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
… Storage migration
Disks created with min and max IOPS should keep those policies after live, stopped, and offline moves.
900ea98 to
a7da1e7
Compare
| and host URLs come from `test/integration/plugins/ontap/ontap.cfg`. Do not | ||
| hard-code them in test code. | ||
|
|
||
| Deeper design lives in the Cursor skill |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Skip having cursor specific details here.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, this has been pushed on purpose to be able to reuse. Also, if you could recall, I've asked regarding this in scrum and Rajiv was ok with it as long as such files are not pushed to upstream.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I understand. My point of this comment is Agents.md is meant to be harness agnostic, let it be cursor, claude , copilot. If we want to have specific harness agents.md, it can sit inside their own folder. (like co-pilot-instructions.md etc)
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
| Always-on operating notes for agents working on KVM live VM migration and | ||
| live VM-with-storage migration for NetApp ONTAP primary storage. | ||
|
|
||
| Ticket: **CSTACKEX-262**. Branch: `feature/CSTACKEX-262`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can remove it also.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same as before
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
… text - test_01: move the five live QoS cases to test_14-test_18 so they run while both hosts are in the primary cluster; expunge each QoS VM after its check - test_01/test_02: match the current cross-protocol rejection message
…ed FlexVols Setup no longer selects existing OntapMigration FlexVols. Stopped-VM QoS cases create a fresh pool per case, so repeated LUN creates do not fill one 20 GiB volume and fail with ONTAP error 1245212.
The path-change assertions in the volume migration suite skipped iSCSI, so cases 07-12, 14 and 16 could pass without checking that the volume path changed. Run the assertion for both protocols, as the automation spec says. Verified on the lab: all 28 volume_migration cases pass with the check on. Also remove a trailing blank line in test_01 to fix the end-of-file pre-commit hook.
946c893 to
4085cf8
Compare
| "QCOW2" if protocol.upper() == "NFS3" else "RAW" | ||
| ) | ||
| reported_format = getattr(current, "format", None) | ||
| if reported_format: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The listVolumes API response does not include a format field. So,this condition is always false and the format validation is skipped.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
-
👍 1 reaction
Reviewers
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Assignees
No one assignedLabels
Projects
Milestone
No milestoneDevelopment
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
3 participants
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.