[DPB][YANG] extended yang-model - added 'buffer_model' field #6464

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-01-15T15:25:15Z

Signed-off-by: Vadym Hlushko [email protected]

- Why I did it

The fix for the issue [DPB][YANG] sonic-device_metadata.yang is not aligned with newest changes in CONFIG_DB

- How I did it

CONFIG_DB was extended with the field buffer_model - added representation of this field inside the sonic-device_metadata.yang

- How to verify it

Run the command config interface breakout <interface> <breakout_mode>

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

201811
201911
202006
202012

- Description for the changelog

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

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-01-15T15:26:46Z

Could you please review

@praveen-li, @zhenggen-xu, @stephenxs, @liat-grozovik

praveen-li

Kindly add a test case for pattern:

To add Test for sonic-yang-module:

1.) Add example Config at:
https://github.com/Azure/sonic-buildimage/blob/e52581e919c95e861cf630c9c7e1a840fc5e8ebd/src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/yangTest.json#L2

Example config should be in sonic-yang format.

2.) Add matching detail and expected error string at:
https://github.com/Azure/sonic-buildimage/blob/e52581e919c95e861cf630c9c7e1a840fc5e8ebd/src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/test_yang_model.py#L52

If You add a new leaf in YANG Models:
Then add the corresponding config in the same format as in configDB.json at:
https://github.com/Azure/sonic-buildimage/blob/4cf9316ec349f80deceb0d7665b0aaf85bfe2599/src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/yangTest.json#L1038

And build both:
sonic_yang_mgmt-1.0-py3-none-any.whl
sonic_yang_models-1.0-py3-none-any.whl

Build tests will make sure, Translation works for new leaves in YANG models.

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-01-19T14:41:16Z

@praveen-li could you please review?

praveen-li · 2021-01-20T02:06:58Z

src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/test_yang_model.py

@@ -215,6 +215,26 @@ def initTest(self):
                    'value': 'disable'
                }
            },
+            'DEVICE_METADATA_CORRECT_BUFFER_MODEL_PATTERN': {
+                'desc': 'DEVICE_METADATA correct value for BUFFER_MODEL field',
+                'eStr': self.defaultYANGFailure['Verify'],


Just Say self.defaultYANGFailure['None']

And Remove:

'verify': {'xpath': '/sonic-device_metadata:sonic-device_metadata/DEVICE_METADATA/localhost/buffer_model', 'key': 'sonic-device_metadata:buffer_model', 'value': 'dynamic'

We usually use verify for default statements in YANG.

praveen-li · 2021-01-20T02:07:23Z

src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/test_yang_model.py

+            'DEVICE_METADATA_CORRECT_BUFFER_MODEL_PATTERN2': {
+                'desc': 'DEVICE_METADATA correct value for BUFFER_MODEL field',
+                'eStr': self.defaultYANGFailure['Verify'],
+                'verify': {'xpath': '/sonic-device_metadata:sonic-device_metadata/DEVICE_METADATA/localhost/buffer_model',


vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-01-25T09:21:24Z

@praveen-li could you please review?

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-01-26T08:03:52Z

retest Azure.sonic-buildimage please

praveen-li · 2021-01-27T18:22:34Z

src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/yangTest.json

+                "platform": "x86_64-mlnx_msn4700-r0",
+                "hostname": "DUT-ASW",
+                "bgp_asn": "65000",
+                "buffer_model": "separated"


It will be great if the value itself can be "incorrect_pattern" instead of "separated".
ping me after that and I will approve, thx a lot.

@praveen-li, done

liat-grozovik · 2021-01-31T07:23:55Z

/AzurePipelines run

azure-pipelines · 2021-01-31T07:24:04Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-01T13:12:46Z

@lguohan seems like KVM tests are stuck for more than a day. is this is known? how can we overcome it?

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-03T17:41:50Z

@lguohan we have no KVM test results. how can we merge?

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-02-04T19:13:24Z

/AzurePipelines run

azure-pipelines · 2021-02-04T19:13:29Z

Commenter does not have sufficient privileges for PR 6464 in repo Azure/sonic-buildimage

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-07T09:23:46Z

/AzurePipelines run

azure-pipelines · 2021-02-07T09:23:56Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-10T15:43:57Z

/AzurePipelines run

azure-pipelines · 2021-02-10T15:44:09Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-17T17:35:47Z

/AzurePipleines run

liat-grozovik · 2021-02-21T07:06:35Z

@lguohan Azure.sonic-buildimage is pending results for that last few days. Can you please help to merge?

anshuv-mfst · 2021-02-24T21:24:52Z

Hi @vadymhlushko-mlnx - Could you please join YANG subgroup meeting 2/25 (10-11am pst) to review with the YANG community, thanks.

praveen-li · 2021-03-29T05:30:13Z

src/sonic-yang-models/tests/yang_model_tests/yangTest.json

@@ -1263,6 +1293,738 @@
 		}
 	},

+	"SAMPLE_CONFIG_DB_JSON": {


I think, this diff is not expected ?

@praveen-li, I did git rebase, so this diff is expected because there was a merge conflicts, because "SAMPLE_CONFIG_DB_JSON" keys increased with new fields in yangTest.json file.

praveen-li · 2021-03-29T05:32:53Z

@praveen-li , who to sign off this pr?

@lguohan : I have requested a changes on this PR, after that I can approve it.

liat-grozovik · 2021-04-04T07:28:59Z

@vadymhlushko-mlnx please handle conflicts.
@praveen-li could you please confirm your request changes were handled and PR can be approved?

…est cases Signed-off-by: Vadym Hlushko <[email protected]>

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-04-05T12:29:42Z

@praveen-li, could you please review?

I have reworked this PR, according to the last changes in sonic-yang-models folder.

liat-grozovik · 2021-04-07T17:41:28Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2021-04-07T17:41:40Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

liat-grozovik · 2021-04-10T13:43:29Z

@praveen-li could you please also approve?

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-04-14T05:58:43Z

@praveen-li could you please also approve?

anshuv-mfst · 2021-04-15T22:33:07Z

Hi @neethajohn - Could you please take a look, thanks.

vadymhlushko-mlnx · 2021-04-22T06:34:57Z

@praveen-li could you please merge?

liat-grozovik · 2021-04-22T07:00:18Z

removed the 202012 label. I don't think we should have it on 202012. DPB should be released as part of 202106.
since all tests pass and approval was provided, I merged it.

longhuan-cisco · 2021-05-21T23:37:38Z

removed the 202012 label. I don't think we should have it on 202012. DPB should be released as part of 202106.

@liat-grozovik T0/T1 support is planned with 202012. Don't we need DPB supported for that? Just would like to confirm. Thanks.

…est cases (sonic-net#6464) - Why I did it The fix for the issue [DPB][YANG] sonic-device_metadata.yang is not aligned with newest changes in CONFIG_DB - How I did it CONFIG_DB was extended with the field buffer_model - added representation of this field inside the sonic-device_metadata.yang - How to verify it Run the command config interface breakout <interface> <breakout_mode> Signed-off-by: Vadym Hlushko <[email protected]>

praveen-li suggested changes Jan 15, 2021

View reviewed changes

praveen-li reviewed Jan 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

praveen-li reviewed Jan 27, 2021

View reviewed changes

liat-grozovik added the Bug 🐛 label Jan 28, 2021

praveen-li previously approved these changes Jan 28, 2021

View reviewed changes

liat-grozovik previously approved these changes Jan 31, 2021

View reviewed changes

liat-grozovik added the Request for 202012 Branch label Jan 31, 2021

lguohan added the YANG YANG model related changes label Feb 4, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx requested a review from lguohan as a code owner February 6, 2021 20:29

vadymhlushko-mlnx mentioned this pull request Feb 9, 2021

[port auto-neg] Add yang model for port auto-neg feature Junchao-Mellanox/sonic-buildimage#54

Closed

4 tasks

praveen-li suggested changes Mar 29, 2021

View reviewed changes

vadymhlushko-mlnx force-pushed the dpb_yang_device_metadata_extension branch 2 times, most recently from 19ae560 to a95a900 Compare March 30, 2021 09:34

[DPB][YANG] extended yang-model - added 'buffer_model' field, added t…

90529e3

…est cases Signed-off-by: Vadym Hlushko <[email protected]>

vadymhlushko-mlnx force-pushed the dpb_yang_device_metadata_extension branch from a95a900 to 90529e3 Compare April 5, 2021 12:27

lguohan approved these changes Apr 8, 2021

View reviewed changes

praveen-li approved these changes Apr 14, 2021

View reviewed changes

anshuv-mfst requested a review from neethajohn April 15, 2021 22:32

neethajohn approved these changes Apr 16, 2021

View reviewed changes

liat-grozovik removed the Request for 202012 Branch label Apr 22, 2021

liat-grozovik merged commit 6bcea45 into sonic-net:master Apr 22, 2021

praveen-li mentioned this pull request Jan 10, 2022

[yang-models] device_metadata validation issue #9699

Closed

vadymhlushko-mlnx deleted the dpb_yang_device_metadata_extension branch August 16, 2022 13:38

[DPB][YANG] extended yang-model - added 'buffer_model' field #6464

[DPB][YANG] extended yang-model - added 'buffer_model' field #6464

Conversation

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 15, 2021 • edited by liat-grozovik Loading

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 15, 2021

praveen-li left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 19, 2021

praveen-li Jan 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

praveen-li Jan 20, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 25, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 26, 2021

praveen-li Jan 27, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vadymhlushko-mlnx Jan 28, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liat-grozovik commented Jan 31, 2021

azure-pipelines bot commented Jan 31, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 1, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 3, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Feb 4, 2021

azure-pipelines bot commented Feb 4, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 7, 2021

azure-pipelines bot commented Feb 7, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 10, 2021

azure-pipelines bot commented Feb 10, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 17, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Feb 21, 2021

anshuv-mfst commented Feb 24, 2021

praveen-li Mar 29, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vadymhlushko-mlnx Mar 30, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

praveen-li commented Mar 29, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Apr 4, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Apr 5, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Apr 7, 2021

azure-pipelines bot commented Apr 7, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Apr 10, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Apr 14, 2021

anshuv-mfst commented Apr 15, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Apr 22, 2021

liat-grozovik commented Apr 22, 2021 • edited Loading

longhuan-cisco commented May 21, 2021

vadymhlushko-mlnx commented Jan 15, 2021 •

edited by liat-grozovik

Loading

liat-grozovik commented Apr 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading