Skip to content

[action] [PR:12290] [tests/configlet] Update configlet test to align with swss update#13984

Merged
mssonicbld merged 1 commit intosonic-net:202311from
mssonicbld:cherry/202311/12290
Aug 5, 2024
Merged

[action] [PR:12290] [tests/configlet] Update configlet test to align with swss update#13984
mssonicbld merged 1 commit intosonic-net:202311from
mssonicbld:cherry/202311/12290

Conversation

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

Description of PR

Summary: Skip comparison of two new fields that introduced by swss update
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

  • Bug fix
  • Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
  • Test case(new/improvement)

Back port request

  • 201911
  • 202012
  • 202205
  • 202305
  • 202311

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

The swss introduce flap count and last flap time. The test fail because the two new fields mismatch. But these two fields are not affect the correctness of configlet test. sonic-net/sonic-swss#3052

How did you do it?

Add two fields to skip val.

How did you verify/test it?

E2E test using the sonic-swss updated image.

02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/common.py:359:02:31:34 patch_rm: compared dump state-db mismatch_cnt=0 msg=
02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/common.py:385:02:31:34 patch_rm: generic_patch_rm_t0: Succeeded to compare
02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/base_test.py:294:02:31:34 patch_rm: Test run is good!
PASSED [100%]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- live log teardown ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any platform specific information?

Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?

Documentation

…nic-net#12290)

Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
The swss introduce flap count and last flap time. The test fail because the two new fields mismatch. But these two fields are not affect the correctness of configlet test. sonic-net/sonic-swss#3052

How did you do it?
Add two fields to skip val.

How did you verify/test it?
E2E test using the sonic-swss updated image.

02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/common.py:359:02:31:34 patch_rm: compared dump state-db mismatch_cnt=0 msg=
02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/common.py:385:02:31:34 patch_rm: generic_patch_rm_t0: Succeeded to compare
02:31:34 helpers.log_msg L0060 INFO | /var/src/sonic-mgmt-int/tests/configlet/util/base_test.py:294:02:31:34 patch_rm: Test run is good!
PASSED [100%]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- live log teardown ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

co-authorized by: [email protected]
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Original PR: #12290

@mssonicbld mssonicbld merged commit d12643f into sonic-net:202311 Aug 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants