conformance: Move Inference Extension conformance helper functions to gateway-api/conformance by ericdbishop · Pull Request #4602 · kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api

ericdbishop · 2026-02-25T20:08:45Z

What type of PR is this?

/area conformance-machinery

What this PR does / why we need it:

Moving code from gateway-api-inference-extension/conformance that relies on importing Gateway API CRD types (mostly used there for checking status of Gateways when running conformance tests).

Part of an effort to improve conformance and circular dependency issues for projects that import both gateway-api/conformance and gateway-api-inference-extension/conformance: #4478

PR in gateway-api-inference-extension to be merged after this: kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api-inference-extension#2433

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

…ctions in gateway-api/conformance Signed-off-by: Eric Bishop <ericbish.dev@gmail.com>

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-02-25T20:08:52Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ericdbishop
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign sunjaybhatia for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

conformance/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-02-25T20:08:56Z

Hi @ericdbishop. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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-sigs/prow repository.

ericdbishop · 2026-02-25T20:08:59Z

Work in progress.

Signed-off-by: Eric Bishop <ericbish.dev@gmail.com>

snorwin · 2026-02-27T08:10:26Z

conformance/utils/kubernetes/helpers.go

+}
+
+// NOTE: Used in Gateway API Inference Extension conformance.
+func GetGatewayAcceptedCondition() metav1.Condition {


@ericdbishop Could you clarify why this function needs to be part of this repository if it’s only used for Inference Extension conformance?

I don’t quite see how this helps eliminate the circular dependencies.

So my understanding was that any helper functions to check Gateway API CRD statuses/usage of the gatewayv1 apis in gateway-api-inference-extension could be moved here for general use, and this is to make sure that any changes in gateway-api wouldn't break gateway-api-inference-extension/conformance.

Maybe @rikatz could also help clarify what a good end state here would be, as we discussed this in the past few weeks.

Also I realize this PR lacks testing, I will work on that if we agree these changes are useful.

cc @zetxqx if you have additional thoughts.

@snorwin mostly we are trying to avoid GIE importing Gateway API core just for its own assertions, so during a GIE meeting we have discussed about bringing these helper functions to the repository.

Eventually this will change, but for now what we want here is that GIE conformance has no dependency on Gateway API, just on Gateway API conformance

Eventually this will change, but for now what we want here is that GIE conformance has no dependency on Gateway API, just on Gateway API conformance

@rikatz what I don’t quite understand is, what’s the practical difference between having an indirect dependency on the Gateway API (which you already have anyway, since it’s a dependency of Gateway API conformance) versus having a direct dependency on it?

To be honest, functions like this don’t seem to provide much value:

func GetGatewayProgrammedCondition() metav1.Condition { return metav1.Condition{ Type: string(gatewayv1.GatewayConditionProgrammed), Status: metav1.ConditionTrue, } }

Especially if they were introduced just to avoid importing gatewayv1.GatewayConditionProgrammed. In that case, it might be simpler for GIE to use "Programmed" as a plain string instead of adding extra helpers and cluttering the conformance utils.

@snorwin basically depending on Gateway API core broke their release workflow, and we agreed that their conformance should depend as less as possible on Gateway API internals (they need a statement like "provision a gateway and wait to be ready")

There was an agreement during the GIE meeting and we that it was a low effort approach to get some helper functions on our side that would reduce their dependency, and in fact this is a very low effort :)

I am assuming we will come back to the conformance machinery this quarter to do some proper cleanups, and we may revisit all of this, but for now this is not really a change that will break anything on our side

@rikatz sounds good to me. I was just trying to understand the issue.

I'd be happy to consolidate some of these helper functions as a follow up, I have other conformance tasks I'm tracking here: #4478.

rikatz · 2026-03-18T21:24:26Z

/ok-to-test

sorry Eric, I owe you and I know! Just some busy days, I will try to be here soon

conformance/utils/kubernetes/helpers.go

rikatz · 2026-03-18T21:34:06Z

conformance/utils/kubernetes/helpers.go

+		ObjectMeta: metav1.ObjectMeta{Name: routeNN.Name, Namespace: routeNN.Namespace},
+	}
+	t.Logf("Deleting HTTPRoute %s", routeNN.String())
+	require.NoError(t, c.Delete(context.TODO(), httpRoute), "failed to delete httproute %s", routeNN.String())


what if this is not found? should it still error?

I see what you're saying, but I'm tempted to leave this as-is, since it's the behavior they had in gateway-api-inference-extension and the only reason I could see it being 'not found' is if the user running the tests deletes the HTTPRoute somehow?

ericdbishop · 2026-03-19T20:22:21Z

@rikatz Should be ready for another review.

WIP: Moving the GAIE dependencies on GW API CRD types into helper fun…

663bcb3

…ctions in gateway-api/conformance Signed-off-by: Eric Bishop <ericbish.dev@gmail.com>

k8s-ci-robot requested review from candita and snorwin February 25, 2026 20:08

k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 25, 2026

Move additional helpers to gateway-api/conformance

f1ce5bb

Signed-off-by: Eric Bishop <ericbish.dev@gmail.com>

ericdbishop mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2026

Remove GW API CRD dependency in conformance tests kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api-inference-extension#2433

Open

ericdbishop marked this pull request as ready for review February 26, 2026 22:17

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Feb 26, 2026

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from LiorLieberman February 26, 2026 22:17

snorwin reviewed Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

zetxqx mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2026

Revert "[Conformance] copy pkgs from gateway-api to enable upgrade to gateway-api v1.4.0 (#2159)" kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api-inference-extension#2331

Merged

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 18, 2026

rikatz reviewed Mar 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

conformance/utils/kubernetes/helpers.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rikatz reviewed Mar 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

conformance/utils/kubernetes/helpers.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rikatz reviewed Mar 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

ericdbishop added 2 commits March 19, 2026 15:08

Address comments from code review

aa028b2

Cover non-trivial helper functions with tests

6644614

k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 19, 2026

ericdbishop requested a review from rikatz March 20, 2026 15:24

Conversation

ericdbishop commented Feb 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 25, 2026

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Feb 25, 2026

Uh oh!

ericdbishop commented Feb 25, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rikatz commented Mar 18, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ericdbishop commented Mar 19, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

ericdbishop commented Feb 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading