Forrest Babcock
Forrest Babcock
We will likely favor https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/30604 over this pr
/hold Investigating [4.21-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-bm](https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/test-platform-results/logs/periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.21-e2e-metal-ipi-ovn-bm/1993325376343904256) failures
I see where your test ran from the [previous pr](https://prow.ci.openshift.org/view/gs/test-platform-results/pr-logs/pull/30460/pull-ci-openshift-origin-main-e2e-aws-ovn-fips/1988575672938795008) prior to [2989d03201](https://github.com/openshift/origin/compare/bc75f721062991cb286c49a092b21e1fff89ea2f..2989d03201cca34a7fd0704eb9bb6d5cd459ae23) But I don't see that it ran in any presubmits on this pr.
Thanks, need to see what the issue is with those failures: [sig-node] Kubelet, CRI-O, CPU manager validate KUBELET_LOG_LEVEL [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel]" [Total: 5, Pass: 0, Fail: 5, Flake: 0]
I don't think this is a retest issue. Even if it was, a new known flaky test won't get approved.
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips e2e-gcp-ovn e2e-vsphere-ovn verify
/payload-job periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.21-e2e-agent-ha-dualstack-conformance
/payload-aggregate periodic-ci-openshift-release-master-nightly-4.21-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade-fips 10
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips
/test e2e-aws-ovn-fips