fix e2e

[jpinsonneau]

Description

Fix e2e:

• gRPC case:
  • renamed to IfDirections and Interfaces and check for arrays
• IPFIX case:
  • check for FlowDirection and Interface
  • updated flp dependency since it's involved in this e2e test

I would recommend to move away these tests to a new dedicated repo to avoid going back and forth updating dependencies. These could also include console plugin cypress tests, operator deployment and CLI in future.

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• [ ] Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• [ ] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• [ ] Does this PR require product documentation?
  • [ ] If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
  • [ ] If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• [ ] Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
  • [ ] If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • [ ] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • [ ] Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • [x] No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 36.74%. Comparing base (e9bf0d0) to head (b9179c7). Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #296 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 36.74% 36.74% ======================================= Files 42 42 Lines 3813 3813 ======================================= Hits 1401 1401 Misses 2334 2334 Partials 78 78 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/pull/296/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/pull/296/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv) | `36.74% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[msherif1234]

/lgtm assuming e2e will pass, also I am not sure why u updated FLP in this PR but have no prob with that

[jpinsonneau]

/lgtm assuming e2e will pass, also I am not sure why u updated FLP in this PR but have no prob with that

@msherif1234 I have issues with IPFIX export, I wonder if it's broken :thinking: I get nil even if I check for old fields

[msherif1234]

/lgtm

[openshift-ci[bot]]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by:

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files: - **[OWNERS](https://github.com/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/blob/main/OWNERS)** Approvers can indicate their approval by writing `/approve` in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing `/approve cancel` in a comment