Skip ROUTE_TABLE and NEIGH_RESOLVE_TABLE entries for test_add_rack.py#13799
Merged
StormLiangMS merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom Aug 8, 2024
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Is it possible that the PR affects other vendor SKU? |
Collaborator
|
@bobbymcgonigle PR conflicts with 202311 branch |
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2024
…sonic-net#13799) What is the motivation for this PR? To get this test passing on master, 202405, 202311 How did you do it? Skip the APPL_DB comparison entries How did you verify/test it? The test passes on all branches on Arista SKUs now
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202405: #14034 |
Merged
8 tasks
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2024
…#13799) What is the motivation for this PR? To get this test passing on master, 202405, 202311 How did you do it? Skip the APPL_DB comparison entries How did you verify/test it? The test passes on all branches on Arista SKUs now
mssonicbld
added
Included in 202405 branch
and removed
Created PR to 202405 branch
labels
arista-hpandya
pushed a commit
to arista-hpandya/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 2, 2024
…sonic-net#13799) What is the motivation for this PR? To get this test passing on master, 202405, 202311 How did you do it? Skip the APPL_DB comparison entries How did you verify/test it? The test passes on all branches on Arista SKUs now
vikshaw-Nokia
pushed a commit
to vikshaw-Nokia/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 23, 2024
…sonic-net#13799) What is the motivation for this PR? To get this test passing on master, 202405, 202311 How did you do it? Skip the APPL_DB comparison entries How did you verify/test it? The test passes on all branches on Arista SKUs now
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of PR
Summary:
For T1 topo on boot there are some route table entries that already exist for Ethernet128 (test_add_rack uses this intf explicitly).
test_add_rack takes a snapshot of the DB at this point and after applying patch_add.json to config. It compares the two and succeeds.
test_add_rack now applies patch_rm.json. This removes the BGP_NEIGHBOUR and /INTERFACE/Ethernet128 entries. Once this happens, APPL_DB will purge it's ROUTE table entries for Ethernet128. Fix is to skip these entries for APPL_DB comparison. We also see the same issue for NEIGH_RESOLVE_TABLE entries; @wen587 confirmed we can skip these too.
The missing entries are:
Fixes # (issue)
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
To get this test passing on master, 202405, 202311
How did you do it?
Skip the APPL_DB comparison entries
How did you verify/test it?
The test passes on all branches on Arista SKUs now
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation