-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 819
modifying snmp psu test to fit format using psu keys instead of index #11944
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
Conversation
The pre-commit check detected issues in the files touched by this pull request. Detailed pre-commit check results: To run the pre-commit checks locally, you can follow below steps:
|
/azp run |
Commenter does not have sufficient privileges for PR 11944 in repo sonic-net/sonic-mgmt |
seems that kvmtest-t0 is timing out after about 75% completion, seems its getting stuck somewhere. I wouldn't expect this behavior to happen as a result of this PR, worst this would do is cause a failure on the specific case though it shouldn't. |
Have kickstart the test again to see if it can pass now... |
@SuvarnaMeenakshi : can you help review of this ? |
The pre-commit check detected issues in the files touched by this pull request. Detailed pre-commit check results: To run the pre-commit checks locally, you can follow below steps:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
/azp run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@gregoryboudreau snmp/test_snmp_psu.py is failing in the PR test, please check |
if I had to guess, it seems the issue is due to a query for the PSU keys being piped into natsort occurring before the check below:
Was a miss on my part! Will update. |
/azp run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@judyjoseph Can u pls check this PR |
- What I did Modified snmp implementation of Cisco MIB to use updated format for psu keys instead of index of PSU - How I did it Used a consistently sorted list of keys to allow for the modified statedb key naming for psus - How to verify it Ran the associated sonic-mgmt tests for PSUs (phy_entity and snmp_psu) - Description for the changelog Modifies SNMP implementation of Cisco PSUs to use key names instead of simple indexing Related PRs: sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#11944 sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3208 sonic-net/sonic-platform-daemons#446
Waiting for all code changes to be merged before the test change |
just fyi, the test change is backwards compatible with the prior implementation |
@judyjoseph all other PRs are merged. Pls check. |
Description of PR
Modifies SNMP test cases to use ordered offsets of psu keys instead of direct indexing for PSU information in the snmp facts
Summary:
Fixes testcase to work with modifications as a part of sonic-net/sonic-snmpagent#312
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
Fix SNMP test case to work with new implementation for psus
How did you do it?
Have snmp_psu info being traversed via an ordered offset for comparison with the SNMP populated facts
How did you verify/test it?
Ran modified test cases on Cisco SONiC distributed chassis
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation
Related PRs:
sonic-net/sonic-utilities#3208
sonic-net/sonic-platform-daemons#446
sonic-net/sonic-snmpagent#312