Refactor fixture `recover_acl_rule` and and use it in module `cacl/test_cacl_function.py`. by yutongzhang-microsoft · Pull Request #9312 · sonic-net/sonic-mgmt

yutongzhang-microsoft · 2023-08-07T06:54:00Z

Description of PR

In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR #9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py.

Summary:
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Bug fix
Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
Test case(new/improvement)

Back port request

201911
202012
202205

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR #9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py.

How did you do it?

Move fixture recover_acl_rule to tests/conftest.py and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py.

How did you verify/test it?

07:34:42 conftest.core_dump_and_config_check      L1893 INFO   | Core dump and config check passed for cacl/test_cacl_function.py

Any platform specific information?

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

Documentation

mssonicbld · 2023-08-07T06:55:00Z

The pre-commit check detected issues in the files touched by this pull request.
The pre-commit check is a mandatory check, please fix detected issues.

Detailed pre-commit check results:
trim trailing whitespace.................................................Passed fix end of files.........................................................Passed check yaml...........................................(no files to check)Skipped check for added large files..............................................Passed check python ast.........................................................Passed flake8...................................................................Failed - hook id: flake8 - exit code: 1 tests/conftest.py:2247:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 tests/conftest.py:2257:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1 flake8...............................................(no files to check)Skipped check conditional mark sort..........................(no files to check)Skipped

To run the pre-commit checks locally, you can follow below steps:

Ensure that default python is python3. In sonic-mgmt docker container, default python is python2. You can run
the check by activating the python3 virtual environment in sonic-mgmt docker container or outside of sonic-mgmt
docker container.
Ensure that the pre-commit package is installed:

sudo pip install pre-commit

Go to repository root folder
Install the pre-commit hooks:

pre-commit install

Use pre-commit to check staged file:

pre-commit

Alternatively, you can check committed files using:

pre-commit run --from-ref <commit_id> --to-ref <commit_id>

yutongzhang-microsoft · 2023-08-08T01:05:28Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2023-08-08T01:05:37Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

ZhaohuiS · 2023-08-08T07:14:14Z

tests/common/templates/default_acl_rules.json

+                                    "interface_ref":
+                                    {
+                                        "config": {
+                                            "interface": "Ethernet12,Ethernet16,Ethernet20,Ethernet24,Ethernet28,Ethernet32,Ethernet36,Ethernet4,Ethernet40,Ethernet44,Ethernet48,Ethernet52,Ethernet56,Ethernet60,Ethernet64,Ethernet68,Ethernet72,Ethernet76,Ethernet8"


@yutongzhang-microsoft use the same interfaces for different topology?

No, this is set by pre_acl_rules

Description of PR PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 . What is the motivation for this PR? PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 How did you do it? Revert the change to template acl json. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

ZhaohuiS · 2023-08-09T08:32:04Z

tests/common/templates/default_acl_rules.json

+                                        "vlan_id": "1000"
+                                    }
+                                },
+                                "input_interface": {


According to #9346, should remove input_interface here?

No, this template only be used by backend topo, and backend topo support this config.

Description of PR PR sonic-net#9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR sonic-net#9312 . What is the motivation for this PR? PR sonic-net#9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR sonic-net#9312 How did you do it? Revert the change to template acl json. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

ZhaohuiS

LGTM

Description of PR PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 . What is the motivation for this PR? PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 How did you do it? Revert the change to template acl json. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

arlakshm · 2023-08-10T19:55:32Z

In #9199 the acl.json is modified, which this PR revert this change in acl.json, #9199 cause this isssue ion T2 #9368

Description of PR PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 . What is the motivation for this PR? PR #9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR #9312 How did you do it? Revert the change to template acl json. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

mssonicbld · 2023-08-17T02:32:01Z

@yutongzhang-microsoft PR conflicts with 202012 branch

mssonicbld · 2023-08-17T02:32:01Z

@yutongzhang-microsoft PR conflicts with 202205 branch

…st_cacl_function.py`. (sonic-net#9312) Description of PR In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR sonic-net#9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. What is the motivation for this PR? In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR sonic-net#9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you do it? Move fixture recover_acl_rule to tests/conftest.py and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you verify/test it? ``` 07:34:42 conftest.core_dump_and_config_check L1893 INFO | Core dump and config check passed for cacl/test_cacl_function.py ``` Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

mssonicbld · 2023-08-17T02:32:03Z

Cherry-pick PR to 202305: #9524

…st_cacl_function.py`. (#9312) Description of PR In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR #9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. What is the motivation for this PR? In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR #9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you do it? Move fixture recover_acl_rule to tests/conftest.py and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you verify/test it? ``` 07:34:42 conftest.core_dump_and_config_check L1893 INFO | Core dump and config check passed for cacl/test_cacl_function.py ``` Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

Description of PR PR #9312 will try to get DATAACL in running config in fixture recover_acl_rule. But if param enable_data_acl is set false when deploying minigraph, DATAACL will not appear in running config. Which may cause key error in fixture recover_acl_rule. In this PR, we fix this issue. What is the motivation for this PR? PR #9312 will try to get DATAACL in running config in fixture recover_acl_rule. But if param enable_data_acl is set false when deploying minigraph, DATAACL will not appear in running config. Which may cause key error in fixture recover_acl_rule. In this PR, we fix this issue. How did you do it? Run TC on testbed which enable_data_acl is false when deploying minigraph. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

…02012 (#9590) Description of PR Cherry pick conflict #9523 and #9312 Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

…02305 (#9592) * cherry pick #9523

Description of PR PR sonic-net#9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR sonic-net#9312 . What is the motivation for this PR? PR sonic-net#9199 modified the template acl.json under folder tests/crm/templates and added a key input_interface in this template. Only backend topo supports this key, so it will generate an error log in non-backend topo. In this PR, I revert the change to this template. And for recovery, we have another template in PR sonic-net#9312 How did you do it? Revert the change to template acl json. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

…st_cacl_function.py`. (sonic-net#9312) Description of PR In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR sonic-net#9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. What is the motivation for this PR? In module cacl/test_cacl_function.py, it will use command acl-loader delete to delete all acl rules, no matter if the testbed has DATAACL rules before test or not. If this testbed has DATAACL rules before, this deletion will cause inconsistent between previous running config and current running config, and will cause unnecessary config reload. In PR sonic-net#9199 , we have a fixture recover_acl_rule to recovery acl rules. So in this PR, I refactor this fixture and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you do it? Move fixture recover_acl_rule to tests/conftest.py and use this fixture to recover acl rules in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. How did you verify/test it? ``` 07:34:42 conftest.core_dump_and_config_check L1893 INFO | Core dump and config check passed for cacl/test_cacl_function.py ``` Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

Description of PR PR sonic-net#9312 will try to get DATAACL in running config in fixture recover_acl_rule. But if param enable_data_acl is set false when deploying minigraph, DATAACL will not appear in running config. Which may cause key error in fixture recover_acl_rule. In this PR, we fix this issue. What is the motivation for this PR? PR sonic-net#9312 will try to get DATAACL in running config in fixture recover_acl_rule. But if param enable_data_acl is set false when deploying minigraph, DATAACL will not appear in running config. Which may cause key error in fixture recover_acl_rule. In this PR, we fix this issue. How did you do it? Run TC on testbed which enable_data_acl is false when deploying minigraph. Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

refactor fixture recover_acl_rule

4356cd4

yutongzhang-microsoft requested a review from ZhaohuiS as a code owner August 7, 2023 06:54

yutongzhang-microsoft added 2 commits August 7, 2023 15:02

pre-commit requirement

66b6be2

spell error

327cb21

yutongzhang-microsoft added Request for 202012 branch Request for 202205 branch Request for 202305 branch labels Aug 7, 2023

ZhaohuiS reviewed Aug 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

yutongzhang-microsoft mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2023

Revert the change to template acl.json. #9346

Merged

6 tasks

fix

bff95a0

ZhaohuiS reviewed Aug 9, 2023

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Aug 10, 2023

[action] [PR:9346] Revert the change to template acl.json. #9382

Merged

[action] [PR:9346] Revert the change to template acl.json. #9381

Merged

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Aug 10, 2023

[action] [PR:9346] Revert the change to template acl.json. #9383

Merged

6 tasks

ZhaohuiS approved these changes Aug 10, 2023

View reviewed changes

yutongzhang-microsoft merged commit f59f2a8 into sonic-net:master Aug 10, 2023

yutongzhang-microsoft deleted the yutongzhang/cacl branch August 10, 2023 02:08

veronica-arista mentioned this pull request Aug 15, 2023

[crm, cacl] Refactoring of recover_acl_rule fixture causing failures in cacl and crm tests #9468

Closed

wangxin added Approved for 202012 Branch Approved for 202205 branch Approved for 202305 branch labels Aug 17, 2023

mssonicbld added the Cherry Pick Conflict_202012 label Aug 17, 2023

mssonicbld added the Cherry Pick Conflict_202205 label Aug 17, 2023

mssonicbld added the Created PR to 202305 branch label Aug 17, 2023

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2023

[action] [PR:9312] Refactor fixture recover_acl_rule and and use it in module cacl/test_cacl_function.py. #9524

Merged

6 tasks

yutongzhang-microsoft added a commit to yutongzhang-microsoft/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023

fix sonic-net#9312

8959a7e

mssonicbld added Included in 202305 branch and removed Created PR to 202305 branch labels Aug 18, 2023

yutongzhang-microsoft added a commit to yutongzhang-microsoft/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Aug 22, 2023

cherry pick sonic-net#9523 and sonic-net#9312

3f84ea9

yutongzhang-microsoft mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2023

[cherry pick] #9523 Fix PR #9312 for KeyError and AttributeError in 202012 #9590

Merged

6 tasks

yutongzhang-microsoft added Included in 202012 branch and removed Cherry Pick Conflict_202012 labels Aug 22, 2023

yutongzhang-microsoft added a commit to yutongzhang-microsoft/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Aug 22, 2023

cherry pick sonic-net#9523 and sonic-net#9312

34a4c09

yutongzhang-microsoft mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2023

[cherry pick] #9523 Fix PR #9312 for KeyError and AttributeError in 202205 #9591

Merged

6 tasks

yutongzhang-microsoft added Included in 202205 branch and removed Cherry Pick Conflict_202205 labels Aug 22, 2023

StormLiangMS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2023

cherry pick #9523 and #9312 (#9591)

1fa5387

yutongzhang-microsoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2023

[cherry pick] #9523 Fix PR #9312 for KeyError and AttributeError in 2…

cbfbae6

…02012 (#9590) Description of PR Cherry pick conflict #9523 and #9312 Signed-off-by: Yutong Zhang <yutongzhang@microsoft.com>

wangxin pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 28, 2023

[cherry pick] #9523 Fix PR #9312 for KeyError and AttributeError in 2…

91c1bfc

…02305 (#9592) * cherry pick #9523

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Refactor fixture `recover_acl_rule` and and use it in module `cacl/test_cacl_function.py`.#9312

Refactor fixture `recover_acl_rule` and and use it in module `cacl/test_cacl_function.py`.#9312
yutongzhang-microsoft merged 4 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
yutongzhang-microsoft:yutongzhang/cacl

yutongzhang-microsoft commented Aug 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 7, 2023

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft commented Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS Aug 9, 2023

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft Aug 9, 2023

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS left a comment

Uh oh!

arlakshm commented Aug 10, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Conversation

yutongzhang-microsoft commented Aug 7, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

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 Aug 7, 2023

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft commented Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Aug 8, 2023

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS Aug 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft Aug 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS Aug 9, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

yutongzhang-microsoft Aug 9, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ZhaohuiS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

arlakshm commented Aug 10, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Aug 17, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

yutongzhang-microsoft commented Aug 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

arlakshm commented Aug 10, 2023 •

edited

Loading