[t0-56-po2vlan] Fixed KeyError: u'PortChannel201' in tests which can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology#6341
Merged
wangxin merged 2 commits intosonic-net:masterfrom Sep 26, 2022
Conversation
…or support t0-56-po2vlan topology Signed-off-by: Petro Pikh <petrop@nvidia.com>
AntonHryshchuk
approved these changes
Sep 14, 2022
Contributor
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
liat-grozovik
approved these changes
Sep 19, 2022
Collaborator
|
@wangxin FYI. if no objection pls merge this one |
wangxin
approved these changes
Sep 26, 2022
Merged
6 tasks
4 tasks
Azarack
pushed a commit
to Azarack/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 17, 2022
…run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology (sonic-net#6341) What is the motivation for this PR? Many tests supports t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201' It happen because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and second VLAN has PortChannel interface which are member of second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces) Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology How did you do it? In most cases removed extra VLAN/PortChannel from VLANs/PortChannels list and all t0 tests can pass on t0-56-po2vlan topology in the same way as on regular t0 How did you verify/test it? Executed tests which were modified Signed-off-by: Petro Pikh <petrop@nvidia.com>
yxieca
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 26, 2022
…run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology (#6341) What is the motivation for this PR? Many tests supports t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201' It happen because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and second VLAN has PortChannel interface which are member of second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces) Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology How did you do it? In most cases removed extra VLAN/PortChannel from VLANs/PortChannels list and all t0 tests can pass on t0-56-po2vlan topology in the same way as on regular t0 How did you verify/test it? Executed tests which were modified Signed-off-by: Petro Pikh <petrop@nvidia.com>
allen-xf
pushed a commit
to allen-xf/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 28, 2022
…run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology (sonic-net#6341) What is the motivation for this PR? Many tests supports t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201' It happen because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and second VLAN has PortChannel interface which are member of second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces) Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology How did you do it? In most cases removed extra VLAN/PortChannel from VLANs/PortChannels list and all t0 tests can pass on t0-56-po2vlan topology in the same way as on regular t0 How did you verify/test it? Executed tests which were modified Signed-off-by: Petro Pikh <petrop@nvidia.com>
yxieca
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2022
…can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology (#6442) Description of PR This PR is continuing the work of fixing started in #6341 Many tests support t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201' It happens because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and the second VLAN has a PortChannel interface which is a member of the second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces) Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology Summary: Fixed KeyError: u'PortChannel201' in tests which can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology What is the motivation for this PR? Add support of t0-56-po2vlan topo for the test which can run on t0 topo How did you do it? Skipped the validation on the interfaces with extra Vlan/PortChannel. The rest interfaces can be tested as on regular t0 topo. How did you verify/test it? The test cases were executed after the change. Signed-off-by: Anton <antonh@nvidia.com>
wangxin
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 11, 2022
…can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology (#6442) Description of PR This PR is continuing the work of fixing started in #6341 Many tests support t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201' It happens because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and the second VLAN has a PortChannel interface which is a member of the second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces) Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology Summary: Fixed KeyError: u'PortChannel201' in tests which can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology What is the motivation for this PR? Add support of t0-56-po2vlan topo for the test which can run on t0 topo How did you do it? Skipped the validation on the interfaces with extra Vlan/PortChannel. The rest interfaces can be tested as on regular t0 topo. How did you verify/test it? The test cases were executed after the change. Signed-off-by: Anton <antonh@nvidia.com>
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
6 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.
Signed-off-by: Petro Pikh petrop@nvidia.com
Description of PR
Many tests supports t0 topology and they should be able to run on t0-56-po2vlan topology - but they fail with error: KeyError: u'PortChannel201'
It happen because topology t0-56-po2vlan has 2 VLANs and tests expect that topology will have only 1 VLAN and second VLAN has PortChannel interface which are member of second VLAN(in regular t0 topo - all PortChannels are L3 interfaces)
Added fix(remove additional VLAN/PortChannel from list of VLANs/Interfaces) for tests to support t0-56-po2vlan topology
Summary: Fixed KeyError: u'PortChannel201' in tests which can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology
Fixes # (issue)
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Fixed KeyError: u'PortChannel201' in tests which can run on t0 topo for support t0-56-po2vlan topology
How did you do it?
In most cases removed extra VLAN/PortChannel from VLANs/PortChannels list and all t0 tests can pass on t0-56-po2vlan topology in the same way as on regular t0
How did you verify/test it?
Executed tests which were modified
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation