fix(tests): add backplane port only in srv6 tests #16669
Merged
Conversation
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
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
Same fix is also applicable in 202411 branch |
|
/azp run Azure.sonic-mgmt |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
hi @LARLSN could you check the pre test SA failure? |
ok, let me check it |
Signed-off-by: linsongnan <linsongnan.lsn@alibaba-inc.com>
LARLSN
force-pushed
the
dev-lsn-fix-ptfadapter
branch
from
51f6160 to
996eb7d
Compare
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
i've resolved it and Pre_test Static Analysis seems successful |
lizhijianrd
approved these changes
Feb 11, 2025
wangxin
approved these changes
Feb 11, 2025
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Backplane port is necessary in our srv6 tests, but it will cause random failure in other tests. When the test packet dst IP matches the IP prefix advertised by the exabgp, the ptf backplane interface will receive the test packet from the neighbor VM. The reason is the routes are advertised by exabgp to VM through the ptf backplane interface. And methods like verify_packet_any_port() not only validate the packet is received by the expected ports, but also validate it's not received by the unexpected ports. How did you do it? Added configuration options in ptf initial to limite the configuration scenarios of backplane ports only in srv6 tests How did you verify/test it? we tested it via daily jenkins run Signed-off-by: linsongnan <linsongnan.lsn@alibaba-inc.com>
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202411: #16902 |
10 tasks
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Backplane port is necessary in our srv6 tests, but it will cause random failure in other tests. When the test packet dst IP matches the IP prefix advertised by the exabgp, the ptf backplane interface will receive the test packet from the neighbor VM. The reason is the routes are advertised by exabgp to VM through the ptf backplane interface. And methods like verify_packet_any_port() not only validate the packet is received by the expected ports, but also validate it's not received by the unexpected ports. How did you do it? Added configuration options in ptf initial to limite the configuration scenarios of backplane ports only in srv6 tests How did you verify/test it? we tested it via daily jenkins run Signed-off-by: linsongnan <linsongnan.lsn@alibaba-inc.com>
mssonicbld
added
Included in 202411 branch
and removed
Created PR to 202411 branch
labels
nnelluri-cisco
pushed a commit
to nnelluri-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2025
What is the motivation for this PR? Backplane port is necessary in our srv6 tests, but it will cause random failure in other tests. When the test packet dst IP matches the IP prefix advertised by the exabgp, the ptf backplane interface will receive the test packet from the neighbor VM. The reason is the routes are advertised by exabgp to VM through the ptf backplane interface. And methods like verify_packet_any_port() not only validate the packet is received by the expected ports, but also validate it's not received by the unexpected ports. How did you do it? Added configuration options in ptf initial to limite the configuration scenarios of backplane ports only in srv6 tests How did you verify/test it? we tested it via daily jenkins run Signed-off-by: linsongnan <linsongnan.lsn@alibaba-inc.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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
update to configure the backplane port only in the srv6 test.
fix #16585
Summary:
Fixes #16585
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Backplane port is necessary in our srv6 tests, but it will cause random failure in other tests. When the test packet dst IP matches the IP prefix advertised by the exabgp, the ptf backplane interface will receive the test packet from the neighbor VM. The reason is the routes are advertised by exabgp to VM through the ptf backplane interface. And methods like verify_packet_any_port() not only validate the packet is received by the expected ports, but also validate it's not received by the unexpected ports.
How did you do it?
Added configuration options in ptf initial to limite the configuration scenarios of backplane ports only in srv6 tests
How did you verify/test it?
we tested it via daily jenkins run
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation