[sanity_check]: Improve mux simulator sanity check#3678
Merged
theasianpianist merged 5 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom Jul 7, 2021
Merged
[sanity_check]: Improve mux simulator sanity check#3678theasianpianist merged 5 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
theasianpianist merged 5 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
Conversation
* Create fixture to get status of all mux simulator ports from server * Change mux sim sanity check to examine returned status/flows instead of sending traffic * Add support to sanity check for infrastructure recovery actions Signed-off-by: Lawrence Lee <[email protected]>
|
This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging 2530e29 into 1be712a - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
|
Signed-off-by: Lawrence Lee <[email protected]>
wangxin
reviewed
Jun 28, 2021
Collaborator
wangxin
left a comment
wangxin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new mux_simulator server introduced a field "healthy". Would it be helpful for this change?
https://github.com/Azure/sonic-mgmt/blob/master/ansible/roles/vm_set/files/mux_simulator.py#L340
| active_flows, mux_flows = None, None | ||
|
|
||
| for input_intf, actions in intf_status['flows'].items(): | ||
| if 'muxy' in input_intf: |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With the fix of #3359, PTF interface name is not guaranteed to be starting with "muxy". Suggest to use "mu".
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
- Check the 'healthy' field returned by the mux simulator - Update interface name prefix Signed-off-by: Lawrence Lee <[email protected]>
…ianist/sonic-mgmt into mux-sim-sanity-improve
wangxin
approved these changes
Jul 7, 2021
vmittal-msft
pushed a commit
to vmittal-msft/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 28, 2021
[sanity_check]: Improve mux simulator sanity check - Create fixture to get status of all mux simulator ports from server - Change mux sim sanity check to examine returned status/flows instead of sending traffic - Add support to sanity check for infrastructure recovery actions - Check the 'healthy' field returned by the mux simulator - Update interface name prefix Signed-off-by: Lawrence Lee <[email protected]>
kazinator-arista
pushed a commit
to kazinator-arista/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2026
…lly (sonic-net#22860) #### Why I did it src/sonic-swss ``` * 6785d662 - (HEAD -> 202405, origin/202405) Update swss pipeline to use ubuntu 22.04 agent pool (sonic-net#3678) (3 days ago) [mssonicbld] ``` #### 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.
Signed-off-by: Lawrence Lee [email protected]
Description of PR
Summary:
Fixes sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#8105
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Current mux simulator sanity check is very flaky since it is not able to directly send/receive packets on the DUT, instead it runs commands on the DUT that should generate specific packets.
How did you do it?
of sending traffic
How did you verify/test it?
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation