Skip to content

[msft-2405] Populate the Voq system Port information for the local port when the Port is removed and created when the Speed is changed dynamically via GCU#167

Merged
arlakshm merged 1 commit intoAzure:202405from
saksarav-nokia:saksarav-nokia-GCU-systemport-msft-2405
Nov 27, 2025
Merged

[msft-2405] Populate the Voq system Port information for the local port when the Port is removed and created when the Speed is changed dynamically via GCU#167
arlakshm merged 1 commit intoAzure:202405from
saksarav-nokia:saksarav-nokia-GCU-systemport-msft-2405

Conversation

@saksarav-nokia
Copy link
Copy Markdown

What I did
Fixed the issue reported in sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#24417
Added code to populate the system_port information in the New Port structure in orchagent portsorch after the Port is removed and created when the Port speed is changed via GCU patch.

Why I did it
When the switch is created, swss queries all the SYSTEM_PORTS from SAI and updates the PORT class/structure with the corresponding system_port info after the PortInitDone event is received from portsyncd.
Then the port speed is changed with 4 Lanes via GCU patch, the port is removed from SAI and created again in swss by calling deInitPort and initPort. But in initPort, the system_port info is not updated in the new PORT structure.
So when the RIF is created on local interface, the voqSyncAddIntf adds an entry in SYSTEM_INTERFACE table in CHASSIS_APP_DB with empty key since the system_port info is not populated for the local port. For the same reason, the SYSTEM_NEIGH info is also not updated in CHASSIS_APP_DB. This breaks the basic VOQ functionality

How I verified it
Verified that the VOQ functionality works as expected with the traffic with multi-asic after the GCU patch
Details if related

…rt when the Port is removed and created when the Speed is changed dynamically via GCU

Signed-off-by: saksarav <[email protected]>
@saksarav-nokia
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

/azpw run

@arlakshm arlakshm merged commit b2317d7 into Azure:202405 Nov 27, 2025
2 of 4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants