sonic-mgmt: BGP TSA testcases failure in t2 non-chassis#20469
Closed
selva-nexthop wants to merge 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
Closed
sonic-mgmt: BGP TSA testcases failure in t2 non-chassis#20469selva-nexthop wants to merge 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
selva-nexthop wants to merge 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom
Conversation
Fixes sonic-net#20468 Description: Following 4 testcases are failing in Q3D and t2 topology/ bgp/reliable_tsa/test_reliable_tsa_flaky.py bgp/reliable_tsa/test_reliable_tsa_stable.py bgp/test_traffic_shift_sup.py bgp/test_traffic_shift.py Rootcause: Test helpers and CLI scripts could touch CHASSIS_APP_DB based on “chassis-like” config signals without verifying that redis-chassis is running and the chassis DB socket is present. Resolution: get_tsa_chassisdb_config(), verify_dut_configdb_tsa_value(): use CHASSIS_APP_DB only on a true chassis supervisor; otherwise use CONFIG_DB. This prevents CHASSIS_APP_DB queries on non‑chassis/linecards and eliminates spurious syslog errors. is_chassis_system: rely only on sonic_py_common.device_info.is_chassis(); removed is_supervisor_node fallback to prevent false positives. _check_if_module_skipped_for_mode: evaluate all matching condition entries and honor any skip that cites frr_mgmt_config == 'true' or 'false'. Removed noisy debugging and cache fallbacks. wq Signed-off-by: Selvamani Ramasamy <selva@nexthop.ai>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
kazinator-arista
pushed a commit
to kazinator-arista/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2026
…lly (sonic-net#20469) #### Why I did it src/sonic-gnmi ``` * d29b012 - (HEAD -> 202311, origin/202311) Increase dbus timeout for gcu (sonic-net#292) (sonic-net#293) (22 hours ago) [mssonicbld] * 4646c48 - Fix pipeline for 202311 branch (sonic-net#297) (22 hours ago) [ganglv] ``` #### How I did it #### How to verify it #### Description for the changelog
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
2 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.
Fixes #20468
Description:
Following 4 testcases are failing in Q3D and t2 topology/
bgp/reliable_tsa/test_reliable_tsa_flaky.py
bgp/reliable_tsa/test_reliable_tsa_stable.py
bgp/test_traffic_shift_sup.py
bgp/test_traffic_shift.py
Rootcause:
Test helpers and CLI scripts could touch CHASSIS_APP_DB based on “chassis-like” config signals without verifying that redis-chassis is running and the chassis DB socket is present. Resolution:
get_tsa_chassisdb_config(), verify_dut_configdb_tsa_value(): use CHASSIS_APP_DB only on a true chassis supervisor; otherwise use CONFIG_DB. This prevents CHASSIS_APP_DB queries on non‑chassis/linecards and eliminates spurious syslog errors. is_chassis_system: rely only on sonic_py_common.device_info.is_chassis(); removed is_supervisor_node fallback to prevent false positives.
Signed-off-by: Selvamani Ramasamy selva@nexthop.ai
Description of PR
Summary:
Fixes # (issue)
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