[testbed-cli] Code change on add-topo and deploy-minigraph for deploying testbed with peers on multiple servers#15643
Merged
wangxin merged 10 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom Jan 20, 2025
Conversation
w1nda
changed the title
8 tasks
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
r12f
reviewed
Dec 23, 2024
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
w1nda
commented
Dec 25, 2024
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Pull request contains merge conflicts. |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
r12f
approved these changes
Jan 18, 2025
r12f
approved these changes
Jan 18, 2025
Collaborator
r12f
left a comment
r12f
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
discussed the naming of the 2 MultiServersUtils, seems to be very preferred to be the same. signed off, since other comments are already resolved.
11 tasks
Blueve
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 23, 2025
…t.yml (#16634) Summary: Fixes # (issue) In PR: #15643, it add a new optional variable clean_before_add for template arista_7260_connect.j2 to indicate whether clean vlan range before add vlan range, however, this variable are defined in fanout_connect.yml which will call rootfanout_connect.yml, this will be a bug, because when rootfanout_connect.yml is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined, so, to fix this bug, we move the clean_before_add definition from fanout_connect.yml to rootfanout_connect.yml. What is the motivation for this PR? this will be a bug, because when rootfanout_connect.yml is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined How did you do it? move the clean_before_add definition from fanout_connect.yml to rootfanout_connect.yml. How did you verify/test it? local run playbook
r12f
added
Approved for msft-202412 Branch
and removed
Approved for msft-202412 Branch
labels
r12f
added
Approved for msft-202412 Branch
and removed
Approved for msft-202412 Branch
Cherry Pick Conflict_msft-202412
labels
r12f
added
Created PR to msft-202412 Branch
Included in msft-202412 Branch
and removed
Cherry Pick Conflict_msft-202412
labels
mssonicbld
added a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt.msft
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2025
… servers <!-- Please make sure you've read and understood our contributing guidelines; https://github.com/sonic-net/SONiC/blob/gh-pages/CONTRIBUTING.md Please provide following information to help code review process a bit easier: --> ### Description of PR <!-- - Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. - Please also include relevant motivation and context. Where should reviewer start? background context? - List any dependencies that are required for this change. --> Summary: Fixes # (issue) To leverage the servers instead of a single server for deploying a single testbed, we proposal this design for deploying testbeds with multiple servers. Related PRs: | PR title | State | Context | | ------ | ------ | -------| | [[testbed-cli] Code change on add-topo and deploy-minigraph for deploying testbed with peers on multiple servers](sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15643) |  |  | | [[Pending #15643][testbed] ptf data plane connection for multi-servers testbed](sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15881) |  |  | | [[sonic-mgmt-docker-image] Support ptf dataplane packet poll with multiple ptf nn agents connection](sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21070) |  |  | ### Type of change <!-- - Fill x for your type of change. - e.g. - [x] Bug fix --> - [ ] 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? When deploying a testbed with a vast number of virtual ceos neighbors, we will create ceos containers on same server, however, the server doesn't have infinite resources such as memory to deploy that. To leverage the servers instead of a single server, we proposal this design for deploying testbeds with multiple servers. #### How did you do it? Design for deploying testbed with multiple servers. #### How did you verify/test it? #### Any platform specific information? #### Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? ### Documentation <!-- (If it's a new feature, new test case) Did you update documentation/Wiki relevant to your implementation? Link to the wiki page? -->
8 tasks
mssonicbld
added a commit
to Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 28, 2025
… servers (#125) <!-- Please make sure you've read and understood our contributing guidelines; https://github.com/sonic-net/SONiC/blob/gh-pages/CONTRIBUTING.md Please provide following information to help code review process a bit easier: --> ### Description of PR <!-- - Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. - Please also include relevant motivation and context. Where should reviewer start? background context? - List any dependencies that are required for this change. --> Summary: Fixes # (issue) To leverage the servers instead of a single server for deploying a single testbed, we proposal this design for deploying testbeds with multiple servers. Related PRs: | PR title | State | Context | | ------ | ------ | -------| | [[testbed-cli] Code change on add-topo and deploy-minigraph for deploying testbed with peers on multiple servers](sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15643) |  |  | | [[Pending #15643][testbed] ptf data plane connection for multi-servers testbed](sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15881) |  |  | | [[sonic-mgmt-docker-image] Support ptf dataplane packet poll with multiple ptf nn agents connection](sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21070) |  |  | ### Type of change <!-- - Fill x for your type of change. - e.g. - [x] Bug fix --> - [ ] 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? When deploying a testbed with a vast number of virtual ceos neighbors, we will create ceos containers on same server, however, the server doesn't have infinite resources such as memory to deploy that. To leverage the servers instead of a single server, we proposal this design for deploying testbeds with multiple servers. #### How did you do it? Design for deploying testbed with multiple servers. #### How did you verify/test it? #### Any platform specific information? #### Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? ### Documentation <!-- (If it's a new feature, new test case) Did you update documentation/Wiki relevant to your implementation? Link to the wiki page? -->
nnelluri-cisco
pushed a commit
to nnelluri-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2025
…ing testbed with peers on multiple servers (sonic-net#15643) In PR sonic-net#15547, we define server index in topology file which make topology file and testbed yaml file is coupled. To decouple them, in new design sonic-net#15395, we remove server index in topology file and add dut_interfaces in testbed yaml, so there is no more change on topology file schema. What is the motivation for this PR? Decouple topology file and testbed file in design. How did you do it? Record all information in testbed schema How did you verify/test it? Deploy testbed
nnelluri-cisco
pushed a commit
to nnelluri-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2025
…t.yml (sonic-net#16634) Summary: Fixes # (issue) In PR: sonic-net#15643, it add a new optional variable clean_before_add for template arista_7260_connect.j2 to indicate whether clean vlan range before add vlan range, however, this variable are defined in fanout_connect.yml which will call rootfanout_connect.yml, this will be a bug, because when rootfanout_connect.yml is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined, so, to fix this bug, we move the clean_before_add definition from fanout_connect.yml to rootfanout_connect.yml. What is the motivation for this PR? this will be a bug, because when rootfanout_connect.yml is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined How did you do it? move the clean_before_add definition from fanout_connect.yml to rootfanout_connect.yml. How did you verify/test it? local run playbook
nhe-NV
pushed a commit
to nhe-NV/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 12, 2025
…t.yml (sonic-net#25) <!-- Please make sure you've read and understood our contributing guidelines; https://github.com/sonic-net/SONiC/blob/gh-pages/CONTRIBUTING.md Please provide following information to help code review process a bit easier: --> ### Description of PR <!-- - Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed. - Please also include relevant motivation and context. Where should reviewer start? background context? - List any dependencies that are required for this change. --> Summary: Fixes # (issue) In PR: sonic-net#15643, it add a new optional variable `clean_before_add` for template `arista_7260_connect.j2` to indicate whether clean vlan range before add vlan range, however, this variable are defined in `fanout_connect.yml` which will call `rootfanout_connect.yml`, this will be a bug, because when `rootfanout_connect.yml` is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined, so, to fix this bug, we move the `clean_before_add` definition from `fanout_connect.yml` to `rootfanout_connect.yml`. ### Type of change <!-- - Fill x for your type of change. - e.g. - [x] Bug fix --> - [x] Bug fix - [ ] Testbed and Framework(new/improvement) - [ ] New Test case - [ ] Skipped for non-supported platforms - [ ] Test case improvement ### Back port request - [ ] 202012 - [ ] 202205 - [ ] 202305 - [ ] 202311 - [ ] 202405 - [ ] 202411 ### Approach #### What is the motivation for this PR? this will be a bug, because when `rootfanout_connect.yml` is called by other playbook, it will raise error: clean_before_add undefined #### How did you do it? move the `clean_before_add` definition from `fanout_connect.yml` to `rootfanout_connect.yml`. #### How did you verify/test it? local run playbook #### Any platform specific information? #### Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? ### Documentation <!-- (If it's a new feature, new test case) Did you update documentation/Wiki relevant to your implementation? Link to the wiki page? -->
nhe-NV
pushed a commit
to nhe-NV/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 12, 2025
…ing testbed with peers on multiple servers (sonic-net#15643) In PR sonic-net#15547, we define server index in topology file which make topology file and testbed yaml file is coupled. To decouple them, in new design sonic-net#15395, we remove server index in topology file and add dut_interfaces in testbed yaml, so there is no more change on topology file schema. What is the motivation for this PR? Decouple topology file and testbed file in design. How did you do it? Record all information in testbed schema How did you verify/test it? Deploy testbed
11 tasks
wangxin
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 25, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? In PRs: #15643 and #15881 We implemented multi-servers testbed design, however, branch 202411 will raise key error when parsing multi-server testbed defination How did you do it? Check if key exists before visit How did you verify/test it? NA Any platform specific information? NA
This was referenced Jun 27, 2025
w1nda
added a commit
to Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 27, 2025
In PRs: sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15643 and sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#15881 We implemented multi-servers testbed design, however, to enable parsing multi-servers testbed definition, raise this PR to fix out of key error. The code is already in master branch, and we only need the four lines code to be backport to 202411 and 202405
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
6 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:
Fixes # (issue)
In PR #15547, we define server index in topology file which make topology file and testbed yaml file is coupled.
To decouple them, in new design #15395, we remove server index in topology file and add dut_interfaces in testbed yaml, so there is no more change on topology file schema.
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Decouple topology file and testbed file in design.
How did you do it?
Record all information in testbed schema
How did you verify/test it?
Deploy testbed
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation