/azp run

Hello @judyjoseph @xincunli-sonic Could you please also review the changes?

I have updated the suite calls to use the function format_json_patch_for_multiasic with the appropriate flags to ensure the behavior aligns with the feature functionality.

However, upon reviewing the overall usage of the function from the test suits, it always ends up returning without applying any changes. My question is:
Do we still want to call this function, or would it be better to remove it entirely?

It appears that no test suite is currently capable of applying patch changes to both localhost and all ASIC namespaces based on the function's format.

/azp run

/azp run

Hello @xincunli-sonic @judyjoseph Could you please re-review the changes?

What I have done:

1. Refactored function format_json_patch_for_multiasic to format the json patch based on below use cases.

   • Case 1: Apply changes only to /localhost namespace.
     format_json_patch_for_multiasic(duthost, json_data, is_host_specific=True)
   • Case 2: Apply changes only to all available ASIC namespaces (e.g., /asic0, /asic1).
     format_json_patch_for_multiasic(duthost, json_data, is_asic_specific=True)
   • Case 3: Apply changes to one specific ASIC namespace (e.g., /asic0).
     format_json_patch_for_multiasic(duthost, json_data, is_asic_specific=True, asic_namespaces='asic0')
   • Case 4: Apply changes to both /localhost and all ASIC namespaces.
     format_json_patch_for_multiasic(duthost, json_data)

2. Adapted the call of above function in all test suite files so that it is called with proper flags based on which namespace the patch change should be applied.

3. Especially for suites

   • test_eth_interface.py
   • test_ip_bgp.py
   • test_pfcwd_status.py

   where changes apply only to a specific ASIC namespace (e.g. Case 3 from above) I made changes to the test suites so that JSON formatting is handled within the respective test suite files.
   Helper functions were also updated, where necessary, to include the namespace prefix when issuing CLI commands or making database calls.

Hi @xincunli-sonic @judyjoseph

Some suites require additional changes as they perform database calls to fetch values used in validation to confirm that the applied patch succeeded. These changes were not considered in the initial PR that got merged.

However, I did not include these changes neither in this PR because the current focus is on fixing the JSON patch scope application. Adding them here would make the PR much larger and harder to manage.

These changes are included in the separate Test PRs I have created per GCU suite.

• Shall I integrate the validation-related changes into this PR,
• Shall I update the separate test PRs per GCU suite to include the extra changes there
• or would it be better to create one single new PR that gathers these same-logic changes all together for all the gcu suites?

The required changes are as follows:
For any database calls like the example below, we need to loop through each ASIC namespace if the platform is multi-ASIC. This is because the current JSON patch formatting applies changes to all ASIC namespaces wherever supported:

cmds = 'sonic-db-cli CONFIG_DB keys "BGP_MONITORS|*" | xargs -r sonic-db-cli CONFIG_DB del'

Please advise on the preferred approach

Thanks,
Olympia

/azp run

@StormLiangMS Could you please review?

@okaravasi , your changes on some files seem to be not correct. For example, in generic_config_updater/test_valn_interface.py, the DUT is always single-ASIC. In such a case, the format_json_patch_for_multiasic will return an empty list.

nvm, I misread the code. Your change is fine.

@okaravasi PR conflicts with 202505 branch

hi @okaravasi , do you mind to help manual pick this PR to 202412?

@okaravasi PR conflicts with 202505 branch

@mssonicbld It seems PR changes are already included in 2025, that's why there is conflict in cherry-picking.
There should be there because PR was merged in master before 2025 branch was created.
Commit is also visible in 2025 git log :

commit db2df148ed793d5292acc60588120d13d3b6fade
Author: Olympia Karavasili Arapogianni <[email protected]>
Date:   2025-01-27 22:26:01 +0100

    Apply GCU changes to the appropriate namespace scope for each suite (#16065)
    
    Description of PR
    For GCU test suites, configuration changes applied via patches sometimes target a specific ASIC namespace or apply globally to the card (localhost), depending on the feature functionality.
    
    With the recent merged PR #14098, configuration changes are now applied to both localhost and all ASIC namespaces for all multi-ASIC platforms by default, which is incorrect.
    
    Examples:
    
    Configuration paths like /BGP_NEIGHBOR/ should apply only to the ASIC namespace.
    Paths like /SYSLOG_SERVER/ should apply only to the localhost namespace.
    This PR addresses the issue by introducing a missing flag for "asic_specific" configurations. It adapts the calls appropriately in each test suite based on the targeted configuration scope (ASIC namespace or localhost).
    
    Approach
    How did you verify/test it?
    Ran vs-kvm tests.
    
    Attaching sample results for test_portchannel.py and test_eth_interface.py:

hi @okaravasi , do you mind to help manual pick this PR to 202412?

@r12f Created PR Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#527