Update Mockito to 5.16.1 #10686

erickalendra · 2025-04-09T21:23:35Z

Description

This PR updates Mockito to 5.16.1 from 4.
See the release notes for high level changes: https://github.com/mockito/mockito/releases/tag/v5.0.0

Dependency name change mockito-inline to mockito-core. Inline is now the default and the last version of mockito-inline released is 5.2.0.

assertj-core in user-authenticators/saml2 pulls in an incompatible version of byte-buddy and required an exclusion. Updating the version of assertj is left for a future PR.

The upgrade requires Java 11+, dropping support for Java 8. CloudStack documentation already says to use Java 11 and does not indicate that java 8 is supported.

Test classes using @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) now get run in strict mode. Changes were made to tests where the stubbing intention was clear. In ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest there are 5 tests where the intention of the test is unclear. Each of the statements now use Mockito.lenient() to avoid the exception. Other cases in the tests follow a similar pattern.

Unnecessary stubbings detected in test class: ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest
Clean & maintainable test code requires zero unnecessary code.
Following stubbings are unnecessary (click to navigate to relevant line of code):
  1. -> at org.apache.cloudstack.maintenance.ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.prepareForShutdownCmdFailedResponseFromClusterManager(ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java:189)
  2. -> at org.apache.cloudstack.maintenance.ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.prepareForShutdownCmdNullResponseFromClusterManager(ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java:173)
  3. -> at org.apache.cloudstack.maintenance.ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.prepareForShutdownCmdSuccessResponseFromClusterManager(ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java:204)
  4. -> at org.apache.cloudstack.maintenance.ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.prepareForShutdownCmdOtherMsHostsInPreparingState(ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java:158)
  5. -> at org.apache.cloudstack.maintenance.ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.triggerShutdownCmdMsInUpStateAndOtherMsHostsInPreparingState(ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java:283)
Please remove unnecessary stubbings or use 'lenient' strictness. More info: javadoc for UnnecessaryStubbingException class.

Minor clean up.

Both @Spy and Mockito.spy( should not be used. Favored the annotation.
Both @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) and MockitoAnnotations.openMocks(this); should not be used. Favored the annotation.
Unnecessary extends TestCase removed.
@InjectMocks and new in statement unnecessary. Removed new when issue presented.
Some of the Cmd classes like UpdateNetworkCmd have a type tree that includes fields of type Object. This appears to cause issues with injection, requiring that @Mock fields be available. This is where the following fields were added in multiple places:
- Object job;
- ResponseGenerator _responseGenerator;
Wrong number of parameters for Mockito.when in LibvirtRevertSnapshotCommandWrapperTest.java

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
build/CI
test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

All tests that run with flags: -Dnoredist -P developer,systemvm.

Commands used:
mvn clean install -Dnoredist -P developer,systemvm

Do not need to verify running of the server or agent because Mockito is only used in tests.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

@SPY

Dependency name change mockito-inline to mockito-core. Inline is now the default and the last version of mockito-inline released is 5.2.0. assertj-core in user-authenticators/saml2 pulls in an incompatible version of byte-buddy and required an exclusion. Updating the version of assertj is left for a future PR. The upgrade requires Java 11+, dropping support for Java 8. CloudStack documentation already says to use Java 11 and does not indicate that java 8 is supported. Test classes using @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) now get run in strict mode. Changes were made to tests where the stubbing intention was clear. In ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest there are 5 tests where the intention of the test is unclear. Each of the statements now use Mockito.lenient() to avoid the exception. Other cases in the tests follow a similar pattern. Minor clean up. Both @SPY and Mockito.spy( should not be used. Favored the annotation. Both @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) and MockitoAnnotations.openMocks(this); should not be used. Favored the annotation. Unnecessary extends TestCase removed. @Injectmocks and new in statement unnecessary. Removed new when issue presented. Some of the Cmd classes like UpdateNetworkCmd have a type tree that includes fields of type Object. This appears to cause issues with injection, requiring that @mock fields be available. This is where the following fields were added in multiple places: Object job; ResponseGenerator _responseGenerator; Wrong number of parameters for Mockito.when in LibvirtRevertSnapshotCommandWrapperTest.java

boring-cyborg · 2025-04-09T21:23:41Z

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache CloudStack community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contribution Guide (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md)
Here are some useful points:

In case of a new feature add useful documentation (raise doc PR at https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-documentation)
Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from the committers.
Pay attention to the quality of your code, ensure tests are passing and your PR doesn't have conflicts.
Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Issues, Mailing list and Slack.
Be sure to read the CloudStack Coding Conventions.
Apache CloudStack is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
In case of doubts contact the developers at:
Mailing List: [email protected] (https://cloudstack.apache.org/mailing-lists.html)
Slack: https://apachecloudstack.slack.com/

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-10T08:27:29Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-04-10T08:28:04Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

Copilot

Copilot reviewed 20 out of 24 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Files not reviewed (4)

plugins/storage/volume/storpool/pom.xml: Language not supported
plugins/user-authenticators/ldap/pom.xml: Language not supported
plugins/user-authenticators/saml2/pom.xml: Language not supported
pom.xml: Language not supported

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/network/element/VirtualRouterElementTest.java:174

[nitpick] Consider using a consistent naming style for mocks. Since other mocks in this file use an underscore prefix (e.g. _vpnDao), renaming loadBalancerDao to _loadBalancerDao could improve readability.

@Mock private LoadBalancerDao loadBalancerDao;

server/src/test/java/org/apache/cloud/api/query/QueryManagerImplTest.java:116

The QueryManagerImpl spy instance is no longer initialized, which could lead to a NullPointerException. Consider instantiating it explicitly (e.g. new QueryManagerImpl()) or ensure it is initialized by the test framework.

private QueryManagerImpl queryManagerImplSpy;

Copilot · 2025-04-10T08:36:16Z

...rc/test/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtMigrateCommandWrapperTest.java

+        LibvirtMigrateCommandWrapper spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper = libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper;
        Mockito.doNothing().when(spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");


[nitpick] The redundant spy wrapping is unnecessary since libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper is already a spy. Removing this redundant wrapping can simplify the test code.

Suggested change

LibvirtMigrateCommandWrapper spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper = libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper;

Mockito.doNothing().when(spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");

Mockito.doNothing().when(libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");

vishesh92 · 2025-04-10T08:36:55Z

...ypervisors/vmware/src/test/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResourceTest.java


    @Before
    public void setup() throws Exception {
-        closeable = MockitoAnnotations.openMocks(this);


Why do we need to remove it?

The class is annotated with @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) which is calling MockitoAnnotations.openMocks(...); before every test. Calling openMocks a second time can have undesirable side effects.

I removed the line as it was unnecessary and could issues in some circumstances.

vishesh92 · 2025-04-10T08:38:00Z

.../test/java/org/apache/cloudstack/maintenance/ManagementServerMaintenanceManagerImplTest.java

@@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ public void prepareForShutdownCmdOtherMsHostsInPreparingState() {
        ManagementServerHostVO msHost2 = mock(ManagementServerHostVO.class);
        List<ManagementServerHostVO> msHostList = new ArrayList<>();
        msHostList.add(msHost2);
-        Mockito.when(msHostDao.listBy(any())).thenReturn(msHostList);
+        Mockito.lenient().when(msHostDao.listBy(any())).thenReturn(msHostList);


iirc mockito was throwing errors earlier when an unnecessary mocks was setup. Why is lenient() required now? Can't we just remove the mock if it's not required?

It can be removed. I choose not to remove it because I did not want to significantly alter any logic of the tests as part of the Mockito version upgrade.

It is unclear to me if the mock is not being used by accident and it should be used. I feel the discussion about the test intention should happen independently of the Mockito upgrade.

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImplTest.java

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/resourcelimit/ResourceLimitManagerImplTest.java

codecov · 2025-04-10T09:20:41Z

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 17.17%. Comparing base (4c31f9d) to head (6bc4c5c).
Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #10686      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     16.30%   17.17%   +0.86%     
+ Complexity    13449    13445       -4     
============================================
  Files          5676     5277     -399     
  Lines        499208   466608   -32600     
  Branches      60374    54592    -5782     
============================================
- Hits          81414    80126    -1288     
+ Misses       408722   377562   -31160     
+ Partials       9072     8920     -152

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`?`
unittests	`17.17% <ø> (+<0.01%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

blueorangutan · 2025-04-10T09:49:24Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13006

DaanHoogland · 2025-04-10T10:09:40Z

@vishesh92 , this seems ok to me as it is only unit tests I do not agree with copilot about the '_'s so I say let's merge. Any objections?

rohityadavcloud · 2025-04-10T11:33:56Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-04-10T11:36:04Z

@rohityadavcloud a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

vishesh92 · 2025-04-10T12:02:41Z

@vishesh92 , this seems ok to me as it is only unit tests I do not agree with copilot about the '_'s so I say let's merge. Any objections?

yeah. Unit tests are passing, so not much of a concern here.

weizhouapache

overall code lgtm

vishesh92

clgtm
And tests are passing.

.../java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/vm/MigrateVirtualMachineWithVolumeCmdTest.java

api/src/test/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/network/UpdateNetworkCmdTest.java

api/src/test/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/vpc/CreateVPCCmdTest.java

...ervisors/vmware/src/test/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/manager/VmwareManagerImplTest.java

...ypervisors/vmware/src/test/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResourceTest.java

...saml2/src/test/java/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/SAML2LoginAPIAuthenticatorCmdTest.java

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImplTest.java

andrijapanicsb · 2025-04-10T18:31:26Z

(test env has been deleted due to space constrains, pls rekick tomorrow again)

weizhouapache · 2025-04-14T08:13:49Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T08:16:03Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T09:43:55Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13042

weizhouapache · 2025-04-14T09:46:53Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-04-14T09:48:04Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2025-04-15T01:12:40Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-12979)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 52840 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr10686-t12979-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 141 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

rohityadavcloud

LGTM

rohityadavcloud · 2025-04-16T12:40:06Z

Merging this based on code reviews lgtms, GA/simulator tests and smoketests.

boring-cyborg · 2025-04-16T12:40:31Z

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request!

boring-cyborg bot added component:api component:build component:kvm component:LDAP component:primary-storage component:saml component:secondary-storage component:ssvm component:storage component:vmware labels Apr 9, 2025

DaanHoogland requested review from weizhouapache, vishesh92 and JoaoJandre April 10, 2025 08:26

vishesh92 requested a review from Copilot April 10, 2025 08:35

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

vishesh92 reviewed Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/network/NetworkServiceImplTest.java Show resolved Hide resolved

vishesh92 reviewed Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

server/src/test/java/com/cloud/resourcelimit/ResourceLimitManagerImplTest.java Show resolved Hide resolved

weizhouapache approved these changes Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

vishesh92 self-requested a review April 10, 2025 12:19

vishesh92 approved these changes Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

JoaoJandre requested changes Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

JoaoJandre approved these changes Apr 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

rohityadavcloud added this to the 4.21.0 milestone Apr 16, 2025

rohityadavcloud approved these changes Apr 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

rohityadavcloud merged commit 55c8115 into apache:main Apr 16, 2025
25 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Update Mockito to 5.16.1 #10686

Update Mockito to 5.16.1 #10686

erickalendra commented Apr 9, 2025

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 9, 2025

DaanHoogland commented Apr 10, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

Copilot AI left a comment

Copilot AI Apr 10, 2025

vishesh92 Apr 10, 2025

erickalendra Apr 10, 2025

vishesh92 Apr 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

erickalendra Apr 10, 2025

codecov bot commented Apr 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

DaanHoogland commented Apr 10, 2025

rohityadavcloud commented Apr 10, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

vishesh92 commented Apr 10, 2025

weizhouapache left a comment

vishesh92 left a comment

andrijapanicsb commented Apr 10, 2025

weizhouapache commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

weizhouapache commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 15, 2025

rohityadavcloud left a comment

rohityadavcloud commented Apr 16, 2025

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 16, 2025

		LibvirtMigrateCommandWrapper spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper = libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper;
		Mockito.doNothing().when(spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");

	LibvirtMigrateCommandWrapper spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper = libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper;
	Mockito.doNothing().when(spyLibvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");
	Mockito.doNothing().when(libvirtMigrateCmdWrapper).deleteLocalVolume("volPath");

Update Mockito to 5.16.1 #10686

Update Mockito to 5.16.1 #10686

Conversation

erickalendra commented Apr 9, 2025

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 9, 2025

DaanHoogland commented Apr 10, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Copilot AI Apr 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vishesh92 Apr 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

erickalendra Apr 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vishesh92 Apr 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

erickalendra Apr 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov bot commented Apr 10, 2025 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

DaanHoogland commented Apr 10, 2025

rohityadavcloud commented Apr 10, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 10, 2025

vishesh92 commented Apr 10, 2025

weizhouapache left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vishesh92 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrijapanicsb commented Apr 10, 2025

weizhouapache commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

weizhouapache commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 14, 2025

blueorangutan commented Apr 15, 2025

rohityadavcloud left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rohityadavcloud commented Apr 16, 2025

boring-cyborg bot commented Apr 16, 2025

vishesh92 Apr 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Apr 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading