@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

mismatch: expected 1 and size.Cmp(used) != 0

Your suggestion is better, I will update it.

/triage accepted

/triage accepted

/assigne @jsafrane

why remove Claim.DeepCopy()?

Also I don't know why class was set to nil before. The author @jsafrane https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/commit/1f9f2390cb57832f5fbd02e53d39023b81500cc2 specifically made a comment about storageclass already exist? Is it trying to test default storage class behavior?

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

/assign @derekwaynecarr

@wzshiming: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@msau42 the conversation was dropped after I did the rebase fix, sorry about that.

After debugging the test I saw that the Pod created in this if statement was failing with the following error:

 Warning  FailedMount  7s    kubelet, e2e-test-mauriciopoppe-minion-group-pnq9  Unable to attach or mount volumes: unmounted volumes=[volume1], unattached volumes=[volume1 default-token-b9jmr[]: volume volume1 has volumeMode Block, but is specified in volumeMounts

After some debugging I found out that the test is failing because the claim dynamically provisions a PV with volumeMode = Block and this pod is created with volumeMounts instead of volumeDevices for all the cases, if the objective of this test is to also make it work with a BlockDevice then I can create either volumeMounts (the default) or volumeDevices inside e2e.CreatePod, we could also skip this test for block devices, what do you think?

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/99524#" title="Author self-approved">lala123912</a>, <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/99524#pullrequestreview-600092979" title="LGTM">spiffxp</a>

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

<details > Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• test/e2e/apimachinery/OWNERS [spiffxp]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment </details> <!-- META={"approvers":[]} -->

/ok-to-test

@spiffxp

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/99524#" title="Author self-approved">lala123912</a> To complete the pull request process, please assign deads2k after the PR has been reviewed. You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @deads2k in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

<details open> Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• test/e2e/apimachinery/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment </details> <!-- META={"approvers":["deads2k"]} -->

@lala123912: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. </details>

<!-- Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:

1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/first-contribution.md#your-first-contribution and developer guide https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/development.md#development-guide
2. Please label this pull request according to what type of issue you are addressing, especially if this is a release targeted pull request. For reference on required PR/issue labels, read here: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-release/release.md#issuepr-kind-label
3. Ensure you have added or ran the appropriate tests for your PR: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/devel/sig-testing/testing.md
4. If you want faster PR reviews, read how: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md#best-practices-for-faster-reviews
5. If the PR is unfinished, see how to mark it: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/pull-requests.md#marking-unfinished-pull-requests -->

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup <!-- Add one of the following kinds: /kind bug /kind cleanup /kind documentation /kind feature /kind design

Optionally add one or more of the following kinds if applicable: /kind api-change /kind deprecation /kind failing-test /kind flake /kind regression -->

What this PR does / why we need it:

Ref #98326

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

<!-- Automatically closes linked issue when PR is merged. Usage: Fixes #<issue number>, or Fixes (paste link of issue). If PR is about failing-tests or flakes, please post the related issues/tests in a comment and do not use Fixes --> Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

<!-- If no, just write "NONE" in the release-note block below. If yes, a release note is required: Enter your extended release note in the block below. If the PR requires additional action from users switching to the new release, include the string "action required".

For more information on release notes see: https://git.k8s.io/community/contributors/guide/release-notes.md -->

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

<!-- This section can be blank if this pull request does not require a release note.

When adding links which point to resources within git repositories, like KEPs or supporting documentation, please reference a specific commit and avoid linking directly to the master branch. This ensures that links reference a specific point in time, rather than a document that may change over time.

See here for guidance on getting permanent links to files: https://help.github.com/en/articles/getting-permanent-links-to-files

Please use the following format for linking documentation:

-->

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

Rebase, conflict resolution.

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

@monopole: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

<details>

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. </details> <!-- test report -->

If don't add this, it will fail when run stress.

5s: 0 runs so far, 0 failures
10s: 0 runs so far, 0 failures
15s: 0 runs so far, 0 failures
20s: 0 runs so far, 0 failures

/var/folders/6v/7stmg2756wlfk9c_qnv1hnbm0000gn/T/go-stress-20210227T142520-109974642
==================
WARNING: DATA RACE
Read at 0x00c000424cc8 by goroutine 223:
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.(*testEnv).assumeVolumes()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:401 +0x11a
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.TestBindPodVolumes.func6()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:2023 +0xbaa
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.TestBindPodVolumes.func7()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:2068 +0x101
  testing.tRunner()
      /usr/local/Cellar/go/1.15.6/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1123 +0x202

Previous write at 0x00c000424cc8 by goroutine 81:
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.(*volumeBinder).bindAPIUpdate()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder.go:507 +0x8c5
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.(*volumeBinder).BindPodVolumes()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder.go:442 +0x376
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.TestBindPodVolumes.func6()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:2054 +0x301
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.TestBindPodVolumes.func7()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:2068 +0x101
  testing.tRunner()
      /usr/local/Cellar/go/1.15.6/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1123 +0x202

Goroutine 223 (running) created at:
  testing.(*T).Run()
      /usr/local/Cellar/go/1.15.6/libexec/src/testing/testing.go:1168 +0x5bb
  k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling.TestBindPodVolumes()
      /Users/zsm/go/src/k8s.io/kubernetes/pkg/controller/volume/scheduling/scheduler_binder_test.go:2066 +0x19d3
  testing.tRunner()
      /usr/local/Cellar/go/1.15.6/libexe
…
25s: 3 runs so far, 1 failures (33.33%)

One of the cases where the storage class already exists when it enters this method is in the v1beta1 case, the storage class is created outside this method and when this method is called then it's fetched from the cluster but as a v1 object, do you think that in the beta case I shouldn't use this method?

/retest

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

that's correct, if the storageclass already exists then the test could fail, I can change this to throw an exception instead

/assign @alculquicondor