Fix route/test_forced_mgmt_route.py#13118
Conversation
Test is tampering the running config of the device, thus "config_reload" with the backup config is needed as part of test teardown.
|
The pre-commit check detected issues in the files touched by this pull request. Detailed pre-commit check results: To run the pre-commit checks locally, you can follow below steps:
|
|
The pre-commit check is mandatory. Please check. |
Somehow missed this. Updated the diff, Thanks! |
|
Do you need backport to 202305 and 202311 branch? |
|
hi @yxieca for 202311 cherry pick. |
What is the motivation for this PR? Test is tampering the running config of the duthost and leaving the config in this state. This is causing failures during teardown core_dump_and_config_check is failing during config_db_check. Also seeing loganalyzer failures with symptom similar to ERR syncd#syncd: [none] SAI_API_UNSPECIFIED:sai_api_query:449 Invalid sai_api_t 50 passed to sai_api_query ... (mostly due to config changes) How did you do it? Perform "config_reload" with the backup config as part of fixture teardown (backup_restore_config). How did you verify/test it? Test is passing consistently with the fix (verified on Arista-7260CX3-C64), verified on 202305 and 202311 branches.
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202305: #13161 |
What is the motivation for this PR? Test is tampering the running config of the duthost and leaving the config in this state. This is causing failures during teardown core_dump_and_config_check is failing during config_db_check. Also seeing loganalyzer failures with symptom similar to ERR syncd#syncd: [none] SAI_API_UNSPECIFIED:sai_api_query:449 Invalid sai_api_t 50 passed to sai_api_query ... (mostly due to config changes) How did you do it? Perform "config_reload" with the backup config as part of fixture teardown (backup_restore_config). How did you verify/test it? Test is passing consistently with the fix (verified on Arista-7260CX3-C64), verified on 202305 and 202311 branches.
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202311: #13238 |
What is the motivation for this PR? Test is tampering the running config of the duthost and leaving the config in this state. This is causing failures during teardown core_dump_and_config_check is failing during config_db_check. Also seeing loganalyzer failures with symptom similar to ERR syncd#syncd: [none] SAI_API_UNSPECIFIED:sai_api_query:449 Invalid sai_api_t 50 passed to sai_api_query ... (mostly due to config changes) How did you do it? Perform "config_reload" with the backup config as part of fixture teardown (backup_restore_config). How did you verify/test it? Test is passing consistently with the fix (verified on Arista-7260CX3-C64), verified on 202305 and 202311 branches.
What is the motivation for this PR? Test is tampering the running config of the duthost and leaving the config in this state. This is causing failures during teardown core_dump_and_config_check is failing during config_db_check. Also seeing loganalyzer failures with symptom similar to ERR syncd#syncd: [none] SAI_API_UNSPECIFIED:sai_api_query:449 Invalid sai_api_t 50 passed to sai_api_query ... (mostly due to config changes) How did you do it? Perform "config_reload" with the backup config as part of fixture teardown (backup_restore_config). How did you verify/test it? Test is passing consistently with the fix (verified on Arista-7260CX3-C64), verified on 202305 and 202311 branches.
Description of PR
Summary: Fix route/test_forced_mgmt_route.py failures during teardown
Fixes # aristanetworks/sonic-qual.msft#113
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Test is tampering the running config of the duthost and leaving the config in this state. This is causing failures during teardown
core_dump_and_config_checkis failing duringconfig_db_check.Also seeing loganalyzer failures with symptom similar to
ERR syncd#syncd: [none] SAI_API_UNSPECIFIED:sai_api_query:449 Invalid sai_api_t 50 passed to sai_api_query ...(mostly due to config changes)How did you do it?
Perform "config_reload" with the backup config as part of fixture teardown (
backup_restore_config).How did you verify/test it?
Test is passing consistently with the fix (verified on Arista-7260CX3-C64), verified on 202305 and 202311 branches.
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation