Skip to content

[Mellanox] Update DSCP mapping for SN5600, SN5610 SKUs #21762

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 19, 2025

Conversation

noaOrMlnx
Copy link
Collaborator

@noaOrMlnx noaOrMlnx commented Feb 17, 2025

Why I did it

To have DSCP mapping updated to Mellanox SN5600, SN5610N SKUs

How I did it

Update buffers_defaults_objects.j2 and qos.json.j2 according to new DSCP mapping

How to verify it

Check SDK dumps to make sure values are correct
Also, run sonic-mgmt test. relevant changes can be found here - sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#16440

Which release branch to backport (provide reason below if selected)

  • 201811
  • 201911
  • 202006
  • 202012
  • 202106
  • 202111
  • 202205
  • 202211
  • 202305

Tested branch (Please provide the tested image version)

Description for the changelog

Link to config_db schema for YANG module changes

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory but encouraged)

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run Azure.sonic-buildimage

Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@noaOrMlnx noaOrMlnx marked this pull request as draft February 17, 2025 12:33
@noaOrMlnx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@noaOrMlnx noaOrMlnx marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2025 11:52
@noaOrMlnx
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@liat-grozovik liat-grozovik merged commit dba5999 into sonic-net:master Feb 19, 2025
21 checks passed
@liat-grozovik
Copy link
Collaborator

@noaOrMlnx please have the sonic-mgmt test alignment with this parameters related to the PR for tracking.

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

Cherry-pick PR to msft-202412: Azure/sonic-buildimage-msft#651

ram25794 pushed a commit to ram25794/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2025
- Why I did it
To have DSCP mapping updated to Mellanox SN5600, SN5610N SKUs

- How I did it
Update buffers_defaults_objects.j2 and qos.json.j2 according to new DSCP mapping

- How to verify it
Check SDK dumps to make sure values are correct
prabhataravind pushed a commit to prabhataravind/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2025
- Why I did it
To have DSCP mapping updated to Mellanox SN5600, SN5610N SKUs

- How I did it
Update buffers_defaults_objects.j2 and qos.json.j2 according to new DSCP mapping

- How to verify it
Check SDK dumps to make sure values are correct
yanjundeng pushed a commit to yanjundeng/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Apr 23, 2025
- Why I did it
To have DSCP mapping updated to Mellanox SN5600, SN5610N SKUs

- How I did it
Update buffers_defaults_objects.j2 and qos.json.j2 according to new DSCP mapping

- How to verify it
Check SDK dumps to make sure values are correct
r12f pushed a commit to Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft that referenced this pull request Apr 28, 2025
<!--
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.
-->
1. For spc4 and above, there is only the lossy buffer, so the buffer for
the lossless buffer will be taken by the lossy buffer. If the packet
size is too small, the packet number sent to occupy the shared buffer
will increase a lot, which will lead to the descriptor being exhausted,
so update testQosSaiPgSharedWatermark, testQosSaiQSharedWatermark, and
testQosSaiLossyQueue accordingly.
2. Remove the test config of scheduler.block_data_plane, otherwise it
might raise yang validation error when do config reload
3. When there is no lossless buffer, return a dump buffer lossless pg
profile, and skip tests related to lossless buffer case dynamically
4. Skip fixture reaseAllports for mellanox device, because after qos
test is finished, the teardown will do config reload, it will restore
the config of ports, we don't need this fixture before running tests.
Also it can save 2 minutes
 5. list the relevant Prs:
       sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#20992
       sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21056
       sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#20991
       sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21056
       sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21427
      sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21056
     sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#21762


Summary:
Fixes # (issue)

### Type of change

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

- [ ] Bug fix
- [ ] Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
- [ ] New Test case
    - [ ] Skipped for non-supported platforms
- [ ] Add ownership
[here](https://msazure.visualstudio.com/AzureWiki/_wiki/wikis/AzureWiki.wiki/744287/TSG-for-ownership-modification)(Microsft
required only)
- [ ] Test case improvement


### Back port request
- [ ] 202012
- [ ] 202205
- [ ] 202305
- [ ] 202311
- [ ] 202405
- [ ] 202411

### Approach
#### What is the motivation for this PR?
update the qos sai test for no pg lossless buffer platform

#### How did you do it?
update for lossy case and skip test relatd to pg buffer lossless 

#### How did you verify/test it?
Run qos sai test on platform without pg lossless buffer plaform

#### Any platform specific information?
sn5600 and sn5610

#### 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.

6 participants