e2e: Verify removing partial policy works

Add an end-to-end test to verify removing a partial
SriovNetworkNodePolicy does not trigger any issue in
the operator's deployment.

Refs:
- https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-34934
- #710

Signed-off-by: Andrea Panattoni <apanatto@redhat.com>

test/conformance/tests/test_policy_configuration.go

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ import (
 	"github.com/k8snetworkplumbingwg/sriov-network-operator/test/util/pod"
 )
 
-var _ = Describe("[sriov] operator", func() {
+var _ = Describe("[sriov] operator", Ordered, func() {
 	var sriovInfos *cluster.EnabledNodes
 
 	BeforeAll(func() {
@@ -387,7 +387,44 @@ var _ = Describe("[sriov] operator", func() {
 					err = clients.Create(context.Background(), secondConfig)
 					Expect(err).To(HaveOccurred())
 				})
+
+				// https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-34934
+				It("Should be possible to delete a vfio-pci policy without getting a reconfiguration", func() {
+					vfioNode, vfioNic := sriovInfos.FindOneVfioSriovDevice()
+					if vfioNode == "" {
+						Skip("skip test as no vfio-pci capable PF was found")
+					}
+					By("Using device " + vfioNic.Name + " on node " + vfioNode)
+
+					By("Creating a vfio-pci policy")
+					vfiopolicy, err := network.CreateSriovPolicy(clients, "test-policy-", operatorNamespace, vfioNic.Name+"#0-1", vfioNode, 5, "resvfiopci", "vfio-pci")
+					Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+
+					By("Creating a netdevice policy")
+					_, err = network.CreateSriovPolicy(clients, "test-policy-", operatorNamespace, vfioNic.Name+"#2-4", vfioNode, 5, "resnetdevice", "netdevice")
+					Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+
+					By("Checking the SriovNetworkNodeState is correctly configured")
+					assertNodeStateHasVFMatching(vfioNode,
+						Fields{"VfID": Equal(0), "Driver": Equal("vfio-pci")})
+					assertNodeStateHasVFMatching(vfioNode,
+						Fields{"VfID": Equal(1), "Driver": Equal("vfio-pci")})
+					assertNodeStateHasVFMatching(vfioNode,
+						Fields{"VfID": Equal(2), "Name": Not(BeEmpty())})
+
+					By("Deleting the vfio-pci policy")
+					err = clients.Delete(context.Background(), vfiopolicy)
+					Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+
+					By("Checking the SriovNetworkNodeState is not reconfiguring")
+					Consistently(func(g Gomega) {
+						nodeState, err := clients.SriovNetworkNodeStates(operatorNamespace).Get(context.Background(), vfioNode, metav1.GetOptions{})
+						g.Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+						g.Expect(nodeState.Status.SyncStatus).To(Equal("Succeeded"))
+					}, "15s", "1s").Should(Succeed())
+				})
 			})
+
 			Context("Main PF", func() {
 				It("should work when vfs are used by pods", func() {
 					if !discovery.Enabled() {

test/conformance/tests/test_sriov_operator.go

@@ -2269,3 +2269,25 @@ func waitForNetAttachDef(name, namespace string) {
 		return clients.Get(context.Background(), runtimeclient.ObjectKey{Name: name, Namespace: namespace}, netAttDef)
 	}, (10+snoTimeoutMultiplier*110)*time.Second, 1*time.Second).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
 }
+
+// assertNodeStateHasVFMatching asserts that the given node state has at least one VF matching the given fields
+func assertNodeStateHasVFMatching(nodeName string, fields Fields) {
+	EventuallyWithOffset(1, func(g Gomega) sriovv1.InterfaceExts {
+		nodeState, err := clients.SriovNetworkNodeStates(operatorNamespace).Get(context.Background(), nodeName, metav1.GetOptions{})
+		g.Expect(err).ToNot(HaveOccurred())
+		g.Expect(nodeState.Status.SyncStatus).To(Equal("Succeeded"))
+		return nodeState.Status.Interfaces
+	}, 3*time.Minute, 1*time.Second).
+		Should(
+			ContainElement(
+				MatchFields(
+					IgnoreExtras,
+					Fields{
+						"VFs": ContainElement(
+							MatchFields(IgnoreExtras, fields),
+						),
+					},
+				),
+			),
+		)
+}