Skip to content

Eliminate cross-feature dependency from macsec module#15617

Merged
wangxin merged 3 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
yutongzhang-microsoft:yutongzhang/move_macsec_common
Nov 20, 2024
Merged

Eliminate cross-feature dependency from macsec module#15617
wangxin merged 3 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
yutongzhang-microsoft:yutongzhang/move_macsec_common

Conversation

@yutongzhang-microsoft
Copy link
Contributor

@yutongzhang-microsoft yutongzhang-microsoft commented Nov 19, 2024

Description of PR

Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

Summary:
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

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

Back port request

  • 202012
  • 202205
  • 202305
  • 202311
  • 202405

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?

To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you verify/test it?

Any platform specific information?

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

Documentation

@yutongzhang-microsoft yutongzhang-microsoft changed the title Remove dependency from macsec. Eliminate cross-feature dependency from macsec module Nov 20, 2024
@wangxin wangxin merged commit 3023324 into sonic-net:master Nov 20, 2024
@yutongzhang-microsoft yutongzhang-microsoft deleted the yutongzhang/move_macsec_common branch November 20, 2024 03:30
yutongzhang-microsoft added a commit to yutongzhang-microsoft/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2024
What is the motivation for this PR?
Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?
To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you verify/test it?
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

@yutongzhang-microsoft PR conflicts with 202405 branch

augusdn pushed a commit to augusdn/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR?
Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?
To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you verify/test it?
yejianquan added a commit to Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2025
[manual] [PR:15617] Include macsec module change into 202405 branch

What is the motivation for this PR?
Original commit already merged into sonic-mgmt/master branch and also available in sonic-mgmt.msft/202412 branch as well.
Merged PR available at sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15617

Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?
To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

co-authorized by: jianquanye@microsoft.com
yejianquan pushed a commit to yejianquan/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Jan 17, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR?
Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?
To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you verify/test it?
wangxin pushed a commit to wangxin/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR?
Previously, the common script tests/conftest.py relied on importing a module from the feature-specific macsec folder, creating a cross-feature dependency. To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you do it?
To eliminate this dependency and improve code organization, we created a Python package named macsec under the common path tests/common. The shared scripts were refactored and relocated into this new package, ensuring a cleaner and more modular structure.

How did you verify/test it?
wangxin pushed a commit to wangxin/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2025
Merge 202405 branch in as of 12:23pm 20/01/2025 AEST

b118611 (HEAD -> merge/202405) Use alternate check for reboot for T2 after reboot with REBOOT_TYPE_POWEROFF (sonic-net#16348)
0e0e898 flap interface after sfp reset (sonic-net#16375)
41e2b2f Temporarily skip lpmode test for some transceivers with known issue (sonic-net#16547)
de60273 [Snappi] Infra changes for new PFC-ECN testcases. (sonic-net#13864)
7b357f5 [Snappi] New testcases for PFC-ECN. (sonic-net#13865)
3523a7f [Snappi]: PFC - Mixed Speed testcases (sonic-net#14122)
3754f2a sonic-mgmt: Fix namespace issues for qos tests on T2 single ASIC (sonic-net#15708)
21f6526 [sonic-net#16015 Fix]: Cleaning up unused code from snappi_fixtures (sonic-net#16026)
d8f23be Correcting client arguments to dynamically_compensate_leakout (sonic-net#16169)
3c47107 [sanity_check][bgp] Enhance sanity check recover for bgp default route missing (sonic-net#16357)
37352b8 Eliminate cross-feature dependency from macsec module (sonic-net#15617)
4f33b0d (pub_upstream/202405) [202405][dhcp_relay] Add test case to verify dhcp6relay LLA waiting logic (sonic-net#16494) (sonic-net#16567)
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.

6 participants