Skip to content

Support check_forwarding_stop and wait_until_vlan_cpu_port_up in parallel, and no-dataplan-disruption case#766

Merged
qiluo-msft merged 3 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
qiluo-msft:qiluo/live-asic
Dec 29, 2018
Merged

Support check_forwarding_stop and wait_until_vlan_cpu_port_up in parallel, and no-dataplan-disruption case#766
qiluo-msft merged 3 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom
qiluo-msft:qiluo/live-asic

Conversation

@qiluo-msft
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@qiluo-msft qiluo-msft commented Dec 28, 2018

  1. Support check_forwarding_stop and wait_until_vlan_cpu_port_up in parallel
  2. Support no-dataplan-disruption case, which is normal in warm-reboot test
  3. Ping lo addr instead of vlan interface, so advanced-reboot will work on T1

Comment thread ansible/roles/test/files/ptftests/advanced-reboot.py Outdated
@qiluo-msft qiluo-msft merged commit b9091d6 into sonic-net:master Dec 29, 2018
@qiluo-msft qiluo-msft deleted the qiluo/live-asic branch December 29, 2018 19:28
self.generate_from_t1()
self.generate_from_vlan()
self.generate_ping_dut_vlan_intf()
self.generate_ping_dut_lo()
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@pavel-shirshov pavel-shirshov Dec 31, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do you need this change? #Resolved

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I change the behavior from ping vlan interface IP to lo ip, so it will work for a topo without any vlan such as T1. Based on experiment, I found the behaviors are roughly same.


In reply to: 244617487 [](ancestors = 244617487)

wangxin pushed a commit to wangxin/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Oct 27, 2025
…ute_capability related errors (sonic-net#766)

#### How did you do it?
Added 2 regex to loganalyzer_common_ignore.txt file to ignore
1. sai_query_attribute_enum_values_capability "rv=-8", ignoring
   non-functional error in swss PR pipeline till
sonic-net/sonic-swss#3866 is merged
2. sai_query_attribute_capability "error -2", ignoring till it gets
   fixed from SAI, CS00012422823 is raised
kazinator-arista pushed a commit to kazinator-arista/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2026
[ci]: download artifacts from master branch (sonic-net#768)
Do not create fabric port if mapping is not available (sonic-net#769)
[syncd] Comparison logic log also current attr value on set operation (sonic-net#763)
Add fabric port test to vslib (sonic-net#737)
[ci]: use sonicbld pool (sonic-net#766)
[tests] Remove exit command blocking all tests to run (sonic-net#765)
[vslib]: adapt macsec sai 1.7.1 (sonic-net#755)
Add support for SAI_SWITCH_ATTR_AVAILABLE_IPMC_ENTRY needed by CRM (sonic-net#756)

Signed-off-by: Danny Allen <[email protected]>
kazinator-arista pushed a commit to kazinator-arista/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2026
6cfb3ecb0248768da0a91e5f7fb4477c5da7eb4e (HEAD -> 201911, origin/201911) [build]: allow to use extra inc/lib location to build the package (sonic-net#595)
40d34872d3b7f354adac67f084eebf6ee467f779 Merge pull request sonic-net#846 from xumia/azp-201911
76ac50f147a7d820b19d8d7628a67f2fe4f5159b Disable the build test
6c9cf655b8b5b152cab1d578e05eddf8238b81b0 Fix branch reference error
ca8d81d37a9b0294098f161b036d330d9ff461e0 [ci]: download artifacts from master branch (sonic-net#768)
0cbf4d55c67a9f8f52715f95536f3588acf06c4a [ci]: use sonicbld pool (sonic-net#766)
b6f1265ee9bd86f8a5e909a6f1e9b2384497c906 [ci]: add build for arm64 and armhf (sonic-net#757)
9ec0a7da64d479b124815edc5b505fb88b2532a0 CI: add azure pipeline CI/CD (sonic-net#754)
1436dbe02cd3c56f796c6b3398d4075cd05d97e0 Fix RIF issue (sonic-net#835)

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dosi <[email protected]>
arawat-nexthop pushed a commit to nexthop-ai/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2026
<!--
Please make sure you've read and understood our contributing guidelines;
https://github.com/sonic-net/SONiC/blob/gh-pages/CONTRIBUTING.md

Please provide following information to help code review process a bit
easier:
-->
### Description of PR
<!--
- Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed.
- Please also include relevant motivation and context. Where should
reviewer start? background context?
- List any dependencies that are required for this change.
-->

Summary:
Fix flaky PgMinThreshold test by correcting drop count comparison logic
and packet handling sequence.
The PgMinThreshold test validates buffer behavior between two priority
groups:
- PG0: No minimum threshold (uses shared pool only)  
- PG1: Has minimum threshold configured
The test was failing intermittently due to incorrect drop counter logic
and simultaneous packet transmission causing race conditions.
Fixes # (issue)

### Type of change

<!--
- Fill x for your type of change.
- e.g.
- [x] Bug fix
-->

- [X] Bug fix
- [ ] Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
- [ ] New Test case
    - [ ] Skipped for non-supported platforms
- [ ] Test case improvement


### Back port request
- [ ] 202505

### Approach
#### What is the motivation for this PR?
The PgMinThreshold test was flaky, causing CI failures. The test needs
to reliably validate that:
1. PG without minimum threshold drops more packets when shared pool is
exhausted
2. PG with minimum threshold gets guaranteed bandwidth allocation
#### How did you do it?
1. Fixed packet sequence: Send packets sequentially instead of
simultaneously
2. Corrected drop logic: Enable queue to free up queued packets so
shared pool can be fully utilized.
3. Added PG min configuration: Ensure PG minimum size is properly
updated
4. Fixed assertions: Compare that PG without threshold has significantly
more drops

#### How did you verify/test it?
Validated the changes on TH5 platform where the test now executes
reliably with consistent results as expected.

#### Any platform specific information?

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

### Documentation
<!--
(If it's a new feature, new test case)
Did you update documentation/Wiki relevant to your implementation?
Link to the wiki page?
-->
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants