Fix the hardcoded interface issue in PTF#17965
Merged
StormLiangMS merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom May 15, 2025
Merged
Conversation
|
|
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Contributor
|
@arista-nwolfe, @kenneth-arista for viz.. |
Contributor
|
/Azp run Azure.sonic-mgmt |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Contributor
|
@LinJin23 - please help make this change in all test modules where this hardcoding is done |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Signed-off-by: Lin Jin <[email protected]>
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
LinJin23
changed the title
LinJin23
changed the title
Contributor
Author
Collaborator
|
hi @LinJin23 could you check the cherrypick conflict? You may need to create a separate PR for cherrypick. |
LinJin23
added
Included in msft-202503 Branch
and removed
Cherry Pick Conflict_msft-202503
labels
auspham
pushed a commit
to auspham/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
May 30, 2025
…#286) What is the motivation for this PR? When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min. How did you do it? Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations. How did you verify/test it? Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully.
opcoder0
pushed a commit
to opcoder0/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 8, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min. How did you do it? Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations. How did you verify/test it? Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully. Signed-off-by: opcoder0 <[email protected]>
AharonMalkin
pushed a commit
to AharonMalkin/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min. How did you do it? Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations. How did you verify/test it? Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully. Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min. How did you do it? Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations. How did you verify/test it? Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully. Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
gshemesh2
pushed a commit
to gshemesh2/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2026
What is the motivation for this PR? When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min. How did you do it? Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations. How did you verify/test it? Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully. Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>
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
5 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.
Description of PR
Summary:
Replace hardcoded value (0, 0) in ACL test with a dynamic selection to improve robustness across diverse topologies.
Fixes:
The hardcoded value (0, 0) does not account for scenarios where device_number or port_number is not 0, which causes failures in certain topologies.
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
When running nightly tests using the t2_single_node_min topology, we encountered failures in the ACL test. The root cause was a hardcoded call to get_mac(0, 0), which assumes that a device with device_number = 0 and port_number = 0 exists. This assumption does not hold true in some topologies like t2_single_node_min.
How did you do it?
Instead of using the hardcoded (0, 0) port index, this PR dynamically selects the first available port from the existing list of ports. This improves compatibility and prevents test failures across topologies with varying port configurations.
How did you verify/test it?
Tested locally by running acl/test_acl.py against the t2_single_node_min topology and confirmed that the tests pass successfully.
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation