[Reclaiming buffer] Test cases for reclaiming buffer on both traditional and dynamic model

[stephenxs]

Description of PR

Summary: Test cases for reclaiming buffer on both traditional and dynamic model

It depends on all other PRs for reclaiming buffer

• [Reclaim buffer] Reclaim unused buffer for dynamic buffer model sonic-swss#1910
• [Reclaim buffer] Reclaim unused buffers by applying zero buffer profiles sonic-buildimage#8768
• [Reclaiming buffer] Support reclaiming buffer in traditional model sonic-swss#2011
• [Reclaiming buffer] Common code update sonic-swss#1996
• [Reclaim buffer] Common infrastructure update for reclaiming buffer sonic-buildimage#9133

Signed-off-by: Stephen Sun stephens@nvidia.com

Type of change

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

Back port request

• 201911

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Add regression test cases of reclaiming buffer for both traditional and dynamic model

How did you do it?

1. Adjust dynamic buffer test cases to verify reclaiming buffer in port admin down test
2. Add deployment test to verify correct profiles in APPL_DB, and ASIC_DB have been applied on each port.
   This is for both traditional and dynamic buffer models.
3. Adjust the script which transmits a switch from traditional model to dynamic model.
4. Shut down BGP neighbors before test and start up them during teardown as we need to run the test in topologies other than ptf32.

How did you verify/test it?

Any platform specific information?

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

Documentation

[lgtm-com]

This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging 3959906 into 001c934 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 1 for Unused local variable

[lgtm-com]

This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging 8852a69 into 4f52b35 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 1 for Unused local variable

[lgtm-com]

This pull request introduces 1 alert when merging 8d8b5b3 into 46ef49d - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 1 for Unused local variable

[liat-grozovik]

@stephenxs could you please refer which is the PR that this test depends on? For 201911 do we need a seperate PR or this can be cherry picked?
@neethajohn could you please help to review?

[stephenxs]

@stephenxs could you please refer which is the PR that this test depends on? For 201911 do we need a seperate PR or this can be cherry picked?
@neethajohn could you please help to review?

This is for 202012 and above. For 201911 we already have a or which has been merged.