Feat/add mountpoint field disk data #140
Conversation
WalkthroughAdded an exported Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
Tip 📝 Customizable high-level summaries are now available in beta!You can now customize how CodeRabbit generates the high-level summary in your pull requests — including its content, structure, tone, and formatting.
Example instruction:
Note: This feature is currently in beta for Pro-tier users, and pricing will be announced later. Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (1)
11-52: Test implementation is solid; consider stricter validation.The integration test correctly validates the presence of the
Mountpointfield. However, it treats the default value"unknown"as a valid mountpoint. If all disk collections fail and only the default entry is returned, the test will pass without a warning.Consider this optional enhancement to distinguish real mountpoints from the default:
// Validation: The Mountpoint field must not be empty if diskData.Mountpoint == "" { t.Errorf("Disk device %s has an empty Mountpoint field", diskData.Device) + } else if diskData.Mountpoint == "unknown" { + t.Logf("Disk device %s has default 'unknown' mountpoint (metric collection may have failed)", diskData.Device) } else { foundValidDisk = true }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
internal/metric/disk.go(2 hunks)internal/metric/metric.go(1 hunks)openapi.yml(1 hunks)test/integration/disk_test.go(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (2)
internal/metric/disk.go (1)
CollectDiskMetrics(217-283)internal/metric/metric.go (1)
DiskData(66-81)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
internal/metric/metric.go (1)
68-68: LGTM! Field addition is correctly implemented.The
Mountpointfield is properly added to theDiskDatastruct with appropriate JSON tagging and inline documentation.openapi.yml (1)
294-296: LGTM! OpenAPI schema correctly reflects the new field.The
mountpointproperty is properly defined with an appropriate type and example value that aligns with the Go struct definition.internal/metric/disk.go (2)
105-105: LGTM! Mountpoint correctly populated from partition data.The field is properly initialized from
partition.Mountpoint, consistent with how other partition attributes are collected.
221-221: LGTM! Appropriate default value for error cases.Setting
Mountpointto"unknown"in the default disk data is consistent with theDevicefield and provides clear indication when metrics collection fails.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (1)
22-25: Consider making the test more assertive for new feature validation.The test silently skips validation when no metrics are found. While this might be appropriate for some restricted environments, it could mask issues with the new mountpoint feature. Since this test validates a newly added field, consider at least one of these approaches:
- Fail the test if no metrics are collected on systems where disk access should be available
- Use environment variables or build tags to distinguish between restricted and normal environments
- Document clearly that this test requires disk access and may skip in restricted environments
Example approach:
// Verify that we retrieved at least some metrics if len(metricsSlice) == 0 { - t.Log("No disk metrics found. Skipping validation.") - return + t.Skip("No disk metrics found. This may indicate restricted disk access or a collection failure.") }Using
t.Skip()would make it clearer that the test didn't run, versus passing with no validation.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (2)
internal/metric/disk.go (1)
CollectDiskMetrics(217-283)internal/metric/metric.go (1)
DiskData(66-81)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
test/integration/disk_test.go (3)
1-7: LGTM!Clean package declaration and imports. The test correctly uses the internal metric package to validate the new Mountpoint field functionality.
27-38: LGTM!Good defensive type checking with the assertion at lines 31-35, and helpful debug logging at line 38. The
foundValidDiskflag properly tracks whether at least one valid disk with a real mountpoint was discovered.
40-48: LGTM!The mountpoint validation logic correctly handles three cases:
- Empty mountpoint → test error (appropriate)
- "unknown" mountpoint → log only (appropriate, as it's the default fallback)
- Valid mountpoint → mark as valid disk
This aligns well with the implementation where "unknown" is the default value when metric collection fails.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (1)
21-52: Clarify behavior when only the default “unknown” disk is returned
CollectDiskMetricscan return thedefaultDiskDataentry withDevice="unknown"andMountpoint="unknown"when it can’t gather real disk metrics. In that caselen(metricsSlice) > 0, so thet.Skipon Line 23 won’t trigger, and the test will fail via the!foundValidDiskcheck even though the environment simply has no usable disk metrics.If you want this integration test to fail only on real regressions (and not on environments that can’t expose disks at all), consider explicitly treating the sentinel as “no real disks” and skipping in that case. For example:
func TestDiskMetricsContent(t *testing.T) { // Attempt to collect disk metrics using the internal metric package metricsSlice, errs := metric.CollectDiskMetrics() @@ - // Verify that we retrieved at least some metrics - if len(metricsSlice) == 0 { - t.Skip("No disk metrics found. This may indicate restricted disk access or a collection failure.") - } + // If there are truly no metrics, or only the default "unknown" entry, skip in this environment. + if len(metricsSlice) == 0 { + t.Skip("No disk metrics found. This may indicate restricted disk access or a collection failure.") + } + + if len(metricsSlice) == 1 { + if dd, ok := metricsSlice[0].(*metric.DiskData); ok && + dd.Device == "unknown" && dd.Mountpoint == "unknown" { + t.Skip("Only default 'unknown' disk metric returned; disk metrics not available in this environment.") + } + } @@ // If we iterated through metrics but didn't find any valid disk with a mountpoint, log a warning. if !foundValidDisk { t.Error("No valid disks with mountpoints were found. The mountpoint feature may not be working correctly.") }This keeps the test strict when real disks are present but missing mountpoints, while avoiding spurious failures where the environment cannot provide disk metrics at all.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (2)
internal/metric/disk.go (1)
CollectDiskMetrics(217-283)internal/metric/metric.go (1)
DiskData(66-81)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
test/integration/disk_test.go (1)
9-47: End-to-end mountpoint assertions look solidThe test exercises
metric.CollectDiskMetricsend-to-end, asserts the slice contains*metric.DiskData, and validates thatMountpointis neither empty nor"unknown"for at least one disk. This gives good coverage of the new field and will catch regressions in how mountpoints are populated.
1 participant
Describe your changes
A mountpoint field was added to the disk data structure in metric.go, so that the disk metrics would contain the disk's mountpoint. Updated the documentation file openapi.yml adding mountpoint to DiskData properties. Added an integration test file
disk_test.goin test/integration that ensures that the change in the disk metrics is effective.Write your issue number after "Fixes "
Fixes #139
Please ensure all items are checked off before requesting a review. "Checked off" means you need to add an "x" character between brackets so they turn into checkmarks.