Fix for Everflow ACL Table Configuration Error by Janetxxx · Pull Request #18006 · sonic-net/sonic-mgmt

Janetxxx · 2025-04-16T06:31:08Z

Description of PR

Summary:
Fix error when running everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4EgressAclEgressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer:

E cmd = ['config', 'acl', 'add', 'table', 'EVERFLOW_DSCP', 'MIRROR_DSCP', '--stage', 'egress', '-p', 'Not', 'Applicable']
E Error: Got unexpected extra argument (Applicable)

The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value.

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed

How did you do it?

By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list

How did you verify/test it?

Verified it in nightly test run:

-------------------------------- live log call ---------------------------------
everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] 
PASSED                                                                   [  5%]
everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] 
PASSED                                                                   [ 30%]

Any platform specific information?

str4-sn5600-1

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

t0-isolated-u16d16s1

Documentation

Signed-off-by: Janetxxx <janet970527@gmail.com>

mssonicbld · 2025-04-16T06:31:16Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-04-16T06:31:27Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

StormLiangMS · 2025-04-17T02:27:27Z

hi @Janetxxx thanks for the fix, this looks like a regression to add -p Not Applicable, do you know which one is offending PR?

Janetxxx · 2025-04-22T08:31:53Z

hi @Janetxxx thanks for the fix, this looks like a regression to add -p Not Applicable, do you know which one is offending PR?

Hi @StormLiangMS , I found that "Not Applicable" is used as a placeholder string for ports that aren't part of a LAG, in #6900
For the T0 topo, it's explicitly set:

"src_port_lag_name": "Not Applicable" \
if topo_type in DOWNSTREAM_SERVER_TOPO else downstream_dest_lag_name[0],

StormLiangMS · 2025-04-24T01:26:42Z

hi @bingwang-ms could you help to take a look at this one?

What is the motivation for this PR? The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed How did you do it? By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list How did you verify/test it? Verified it in nightly test run: -------------------------------- live log call --------------------------------- everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] PASSED [ 5%] everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] PASSED [ 30%] Any platform specific information? str4-sn5600-1 Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? t0-isolated-u16d16s1

mssonicbld · 2025-04-25T01:15:27Z

Cherry-pick PR to 202411: #18127

What is the motivation for this PR? The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed How did you do it? By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list How did you verify/test it? Verified it in nightly test run: -------------------------------- live log call --------------------------------- everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] PASSED [ 5%] everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] PASSED [ 30%] Any platform specific information? str4-sn5600-1 Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? t0-isolated-u16d16s1

Code sync sonic-net/sonic-mgmt:202411 => 202412 ``` * | c6a94a0 (pub_upstream/202411) Revert "[dualtor_io] Allow duplications for link down downstream I/O (sonic-net#17909)" (sonic-net#18192) * | de454d5 [testARPCompleted] Cleanup ptf ip after test failure (sonic-net#18170) * | 4a3d1d9 [dualtor] Refine `fdb_mac_learning_test.py` (sonic-net#18092) * | 5964a78 [dualtor_io] Fix the start marker not found issue (sonic-net#18096) * | ce40816 Extend LACP time multiplier for advanced-reboot tests with cEOS peers (sonic-net#17964) * | 0e70ba3 adjust port selection in case testQosSaiXonHysteresis for Cisco-8101 (sonic-net#18130) * | 8bb7203 [202411] Restore disable packet aging fixture 202411 (sonic-net#18103) * | 8f6d1a3 Filter out Not Applicable values in command line (sonic-net#18006) * | 9d5de5c Backport t0-118 test configs to 202411 (sonic-net#17983) ```

Code sync sonic-net/sonic-mgmt:202411 => 202503 ``` * 6b59eaa (HEAD -> sync/202503, origin/sync/202503) Merge remote-tracking branch 'pub_upstream/202411' into sync/202503 |\ | * c6a94a0 (pub_upstream/202411) Revert "[dualtor_io] Allow duplications for link down downstream I/O (sonic-net#17909)" (sonic-net#18192) | * de454d5 [testARPCompleted] Cleanup ptf ip after test failure (sonic-net#18170) | * 4a3d1d9 [dualtor] Refine `fdb_mac_learning_test.py` (sonic-net#18092) | * 5964a78 [dualtor_io] Fix the start marker not found issue (sonic-net#18096) | * ce40816 Extend LACP time multiplier for advanced-reboot tests with cEOS peers (sonic-net#17964) | * 0e70ba3 adjust port selection in case testQosSaiXonHysteresis for Cisco-8101 (sonic-net#18130) | * 8bb7203 [202411] Restore disable packet aging fixture 202411 (sonic-net#18103) | * 8f6d1a3 Filter out Not Applicable values in command line (sonic-net#18006) | * 9d5de5c Backport t0-118 test configs to 202411 (sonic-net#17983) | * e758401 mark xfail on generic hash test for isolated topo (sonic-net#18071) | * c65ceab [202411][dualtor] Skip pfcwd warm reboot on dualtor (sonic-net#18072) | * c509006 Improve disabling packet aging to support swap_syncd (sonic-net#17728) (sonic-net#17739) | * 9dc2244 [202411][dualtor-aa] Fix test_arp_dualtor on active-active dualtor (sonic-net#18073) | * cf12a33 fixed tacacs duplicate user issue (sonic-net#18068) | * 330a893 Fix telemetry/test_events.py for dualtor (sonic-net#18025) | * dc6fee8 Remove admin down ports in BUFFER PG check logic (sonic-net#17505) | * 805d538 Update generic hash test to support dualtor active active topology (sonic-net#16217) | * 7c31e46 [dualtor_io] Allow duplications for link down downstream I/O (sonic-net#17909) | * a7f50c6 Fix vlan vs router mac issue with test_qos_dscp_mapping.py (sonic-net#17846) (sonic-net#18003) | * 9ab1e7a Skip test_incremental_qos on Mellanox dualtor (sonic-net#17406) (sonic-net#18048) | * f42afd0 Force eos default creds to be string (sonic-net#18026) | * be542b0 Restore config after vxlan_crm from vxlan_ecmp. (sonic-net#17767) | * f0718b9 [Fix for Issue sonic-net#17413] Modified the Tx Rx port id list selection for all to all scenario (sonic-net#17919) | * 3eb4ed4 [dualtor_io] Collect syslog to debug (sonic-net#17722) | * d5bd995 Disable PFC-WD during PCBB and some wmk test improvements (sonic-net#17889) | * 2f512aa Update outer UDP sport range to exclude port 53 (sonic-net#17570) (sonic-net#17798) | * 980b373 skip test_bgp_slb advanced reboot for isolated topo (sonic-net#17470) | * 408bf9e Default the inner dscp to outer dscp map to be 1-1. (sonic-net#17860) | * 37495a1 Add dualtor fixtures to no_traffic test. (sonic-net#17916) | * a13b599 Only print the matched syslog in loganalzyer teardown check, no traceback info printed (sonic-net#17926) | * 6127f29 Revert "Skip test_vnet_decap on Cisco-8000 with 202411 (sonic-net#17776)" (sonic-net#17941) (sonic-net#17942) | * 60274db Increase timeout to 5 in verify_packet_any_port for background traffic (sonic-net#17904) ```

What is the motivation for this PR? The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed How did you do it? By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list How did you verify/test it? Verified it in nightly test run: -------------------------------- live log call --------------------------------- everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] PASSED [ 5%] everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] PASSED [ 30%] Any platform specific information? str4-sn5600-1 Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? t0-isolated-u16d16s1 Signed-off-by: opcoder0 <110003254+opcoder0@users.noreply.github.com>

What is the motivation for this PR? The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed How did you do it? By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list How did you verify/test it? Verified it in nightly test run: -------------------------------- live log call --------------------------------- everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] PASSED [ 5%] everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] PASSED [ 30%] Any platform specific information? str4-sn5600-1 Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? t0-isolated-u16d16s1 Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <amalkin@nvidia.com>

What is the motivation for this PR? The shell interpreter treats "Not Applicable" as two separate arguments instead of one value, and causes error: RunAnsibleModuleFail: run module command failed How did you do it? By filtering out "Not Applicable" entries from the port list How did you verify/test it? Verified it in nightly test run: -------------------------------- live log call --------------------------------- everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-downstream-default] PASSED [ 5%] everflow/test_everflow_testbed.py::TestEverflowV4IngressAclIngressMirror::test_everflow_dscp_with_policer[erspan_ipv4-cli-upstream-default] PASSED [ 30%] Any platform specific information? str4-sn5600-1 Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? t0-isolated-u16d16s1 Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <gshemesh@nvidia.com>

Filter out Not Applicable values in command line

b975933

Signed-off-by: Janetxxx <janet970527@gmail.com>

Janetxxx requested review from Pterosaur and r12f April 16, 2025 06:31

Janetxxx added the Request for 202411 branch label Apr 16, 2025

Pterosaur approved these changes Apr 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

StormLiangMS requested a review from bingwang-ms April 24, 2025 01:26

bingwang-ms approved these changes Apr 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

StormLiangMS merged commit 988c9fe into sonic-net:master Apr 25, 2025
14 checks passed

StormLiangMS added the Approved for 202411 branch label Apr 25, 2025

mssonicbld added the Created PR to 202411 branch label Apr 25, 2025

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Apr 25, 2025

[action] [PR:18006] Fix for Everflow ACL Table Configuration Error #18127

Merged

11 tasks

mssonicbld added Included in 202411 branch and removed Created PR to 202411 branch labels Apr 25, 2025

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix for Everflow ACL Table Configuration Error#18006

Fix for Everflow ACL Table Configuration Error#18006
StormLiangMS merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
Janetxxx:dev/jc/fix-everflow-test

Janetxxx commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

StormLiangMS commented Apr 17, 2025

Uh oh!

Janetxxx commented Apr 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

StormLiangMS commented Apr 24, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Apr 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Conversation

Janetxxx commented Apr 16, 2025

Description of PR

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

How did you do it?

How did you verify/test it?

Any platform specific information?

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

Documentation

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Apr 16, 2025

Uh oh!

StormLiangMS commented Apr 17, 2025

Uh oh!

Janetxxx commented Apr 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

StormLiangMS commented Apr 24, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Apr 25, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Janetxxx commented Apr 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading