We should identify the presubmit jobs this runs in and invoke them additional times after they complete with /test $job to confirm that 5 is suitable. (I suspect it is to deflake and that this change makes sense, unless there's a reason we needed 10 for test purposes)

For the purposes of conformance, we should also still try to pick another test that is already proven to be stable, given the release is in ~3 weeks we do not have time to get 2 weeks of non-flaky results for this test to prove it is stable.

Waiting for John & Patrick's feedback on the former, will continue that discussion in #133132.

Thanks for working on fixing the flaky 🙏

/cc @dims

IMHO this should be in scope for milestone as a test deflake, once sufficiently tested, but holding off for now.

/test pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-all

/retest

the picked test to promote below is not flaky.
Kubernetes e2e suite.[It] [sig-node] [DRA] control plane [ConformanceCandidate] supports claim and class parameters

the flaky test below is not promoted in PR #133132
Kubernetes e2e suite.[It] [sig-node] [DRA] control plane [ConformanceCandidate] supports reusing resources

/retest

the picked test to promote below is not flaky.

yes, discussing the other aspects back in that PR.

pod timeout in a different test:

Kubernetes e2e suite: [It] [sig-node] [DRA] [FeatureGate:DRAExtendedResource] [Alpha] [Feature:OffByDefault] must run pods with extended resource on dra nodes and device plugin nodes [Serial] ex | Kubernetes e2e suite: [It] [sig-node] [DRA] [FeatureGate:DRAExtendedResource] [Alpha] [Feature:OffByDefault] must run pods with extended resource on dra nodes and device plugin nodes [Serial] 

https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/pr-logs/pull/133397/pull-kubernetes-kind-dra-all/1953115552314560512

Let's make sure this change isn't flaky by testing it multiple times please, we usually do this with flake fixes, especially ones with arbitrary constants.

/test all

Kubernetes e2e suite: [It] [sig-node] [DRA] ResourceSlice Controller creates slices [ConformanceCandidate] 

{ failed [FAILED] Failed after 0.000s.
Expected
    <resourceslice.Stats>: {NumCreates: 100, NumUpdates: 0, NumDeletes: 100}
to equal
    <resourceslice.Stats>: {NumCreates: 101, NumUpdates: 0, NumDeletes: 100}
In [It] at: k8s.io/kubernetes/test/e2e/dra/dra.go:2170 @ 08/06/25 17:18:16.436
}

https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/pr-logs/pull/133397/pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce/1953137105446113280

/retest

just saw this flake in https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/pr-logs/pull/133431/pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce/1953575194064850944 ... is this fix intending to land for 1.34?

Yes, it is intended for 1.34. It is a small fix.

/triage accepted
/lgtm
/approve
/milestone v1.34

LGTM label has been added.

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: BenTheElder, yliaog

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

The pull request process is described here

[It] [sig-node] Pods Extended Pod Container Status should never report container start when an init container fails

https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/pr-logs/pull/133397/pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce/1953652309154074624

/retest