Updating `test_ecn_config_update.py` to fix nightly test failures by mramezani95 · Pull Request #19246 · sonic-net/sonic-mgmt

mramezani95 · 2025-06-28T03:53:37Z

Description of PR

Summary:
Microsoft ADO ID: 32849826
Modified test_ecn_config_update.py so that it no longer requires a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS.

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS.

How did you do it?

Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB.
Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910

How did you verify/test it?

Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed.

generic_config_updater/test_ecn_config_update.py::test_ecn_config_updates[replace-green_min_threshold] PASSED                                         [ 25%]
generic_config_updater/test_ecn_config_update.py::test_ecn_config_updates[replace-green_max_threshold] PASSED                                         [ 50%]
generic_config_updater/test_ecn_config_update.py::test_ecn_config_updates[replace-green_drop_probability] PASSED                                      [ 75%]
generic_config_updater/test_ecn_config_update.py::test_ecn_config_updates[replace-green_min_threshold,green_max_threshold,green_drop_probability] PASSED [100%]

Any platform specific information?

N/A

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

N/A

Documentation

N/A

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

mssonicbld · 2025-06-28T03:53:44Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-28T03:53:57Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

mssonicbld · 2025-07-03T14:02:50Z

Cherry-pick PR to 202505: #19392

mssonicbld · 2025-07-03T18:44:41Z

Cherry-pick PR to msft-202412: Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#494

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <gshemesh@nvidia.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <amalkin@nvidia.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <gshemesh@nvidia.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <gshemesh@nvidia.com>

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. (sonic-net#19246) What is the motivation for this PR? The test_ecn_config_update.py test fails on devices that do not have a WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS. How did you do it? Instead of updating the WRED_PROFILE named AZURE_LOSSLESS, the test now updates all WRED profiles found in CONFIG DB and then verifies that these updates are applied to ASIC DB. Note: In order for this test to pass, changes on the GCU side are also needed. Here is the PR in sonic-utilities for GCU changes: sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3910 How did you verify/test it? Tested on a Mellanox switch with 3 WRED profiles, none of which were named AZURE_LOSSLESS. The old version of the test failed, while the new version passed. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Yael Tzur <ytzur@nvidia.com>

Updated the WRED ECN config update test so that it no longer requires…

c045b6b

… a WRED profile named 'AZURE_LOSSLESS'. Signed-off-by: Mahdi Ramezani <mramezani@microsoft.com>

r12f approved these changes Jun 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

r12f mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2025

Updated ECN configuration test to reference the correct WRED profile to AZURE Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#187

Closed

8 tasks

r12f added Request for msft-202412 Branch Request for 202505 branch labels Jul 2, 2025

yxieca merged commit fb0d9ec into sonic-net:master Jul 2, 2025
15 checks passed

yejianquan added the Approved for 202505 branch label Jul 3, 2025

mssonicbld added the Created PR to 202505 branch label Jul 3, 2025

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2025

[action] [PR:19246] Updating test_ecn_config_update.py to fix nightly test failures #19392

Merged

11 tasks

r12f added the Approved for msft-202412 Branch label Jul 3, 2025

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Jul 3, 2025

[action] [PR:19246] Updating test_ecn_config_update.py to fix nightly test failures Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#494

Merged

11 tasks

mssonicbld added the Created PR to msft-202412 Branch label Jul 3, 2025

mssonicbld added Included in msft-202412 Branch and removed Created PR to msft-202412 Branch labels Jul 3, 2025

mssonicbld added Included in 202505 branch and removed Created PR to 202505 branch labels Jul 4, 2025

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Updating `test_ecn_config_update.py` to fix nightly test failures#19246

Updating `test_ecn_config_update.py` to fix nightly test failures#19246
yxieca merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
mramezani95:mramezani/test_ecn_config_update

mramezani95 commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Conversation

mramezani95 commented Jun 28, 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 Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 28, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jul 3, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants