Add xfail to test_ro_disk due to issue #18238#18240
Add xfail to test_ro_disk due to issue #18238#18240AharonMalkin wants to merge 2 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
Conversation
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azpw run |
|
/AzurePipelines run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azpw run |
|
/AzurePipelines run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azpw run |
|
/AzurePipelines run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azpw run |
|
/AzurePipelines run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azpw run |
|
/AzurePipelines run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
@AharonMalkin - pls change the xfail statement to platforms on which you observe this issue |
This is a general issue in the test, not related to system type |
| conditions: | ||
| - https://github.com/sonic-net/sonic-mgmt/issues/11349 | ||
|
|
||
| tacacs/test_ro_disk.py: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we actually never hit this issue, but hitting another once with PTF not properly setup. since this issue looks to be a rare race condition, so we are hesitant to take this change.
is this issue still repro'ing on your side? I am not seeing any hits in the latest run anymore.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we actually never hit this issue, but hitting another once with PTF not properly setup. since this issue looks to be a rare race condition, so we are hesitant to take this change.
is this issue still repro'ing on your side? I am not seeing any hits in the latest run anymore.
Will check and update
There was a problem hiding this comment.
from the latest update, the issue cannot be reproduced anymore from your side. we will keep this change as it is for now.
AharonMalkin
changed the title
|
@AharonMalkin - is it still needed? |
|
Doesn't repro, can be closed for now. |
4 participants
Description of PR
Summary:
Skip ro_disk test due to issue:
#18238
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