Skip to content
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

[Dell] z9100 port qos & buffer changes of 0330 to master #2266

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 9, 2019

Conversation

vharish02
Copy link
Contributor

DO NOT MERGE. Please merge after or along with PR 2239
#2239

This commit has the forward porting of changes from 20180330
to master. Unit tested by checking the broadcom registers
for the values. The values in hardware reflect the correct values
except for TC to PFC priority group map values. Master branch values
for TC to PFC priority group map for both z9100 and s6100 in incorrect,
I have a build of Oct 12 master and the values are correct in
that build.

Signed-off-by: Harish Venkatraman [email protected]

- What I did

- How I did it

- How to verify it

- Description for the changelog

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

@lguohan
Copy link
Collaborator

lguohan commented Dec 5, 2018

retest this please

@@ -0,0 +1,1079 @@
<DeviceMiniGraph xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="Microsoft.Search.Autopilot.Evolution">
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove minigraph, use default_sku

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok

{% for port_idx in range(0, 128, 2) if port_idx not in [26, 30, 34, 38, 106, 110, 114, 118] %}
{% if PORT_ALL.append("Ethernet%d" % (port_idx)) %}{% endif %}
{% endfor %}
{%- endmacro %}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

generate_port_lists() will not be called

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

will remove

@vharish02
Copy link
Contributor Author

retest this please

yes will test it

@lguohan
Copy link
Collaborator

lguohan commented Dec 6, 2018

can you rebase to master, seems build is failing.

@vharish02
Copy link
Contributor Author

can you rebase to master, seems build is failing.

Yes will do.

DO NOT MERGE. Please merge after or along with PR 2239
sonic-net#2239

This commit has the forward porting of changes from 20180330
to master. Unit tested by checking the broadcom registers
for the values. The values in hardware reflect the correct values
except for TC to PFC priority group map values. Master branch values
for TC to PFC priority group map for both z9100 and s6100 in incorrect,
I have a build of Oct 12 master and the values are correct in
that build.

Signed-off-by: Harish Venkatraman <[email protected]>
@vharish02 vharish02 force-pushed the z9100-0330-to-master branch from bcaaacf to c9b70ab Compare December 8, 2018 00:58
@vharish02
Copy link
Contributor Author

can you rebase to master, seems build is failing.

Yes will do.

Guohan the rebase was done and builds were successful, can you merge this PR.

@lguohan lguohan merged commit 65f6253 into sonic-net:master Jan 9, 2019
@zbud-msft zbud-msft mentioned this pull request Jul 18, 2022
7 tasks
zbud-msft added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 18, 2022
Why I did it

62b7b56 2022-07-13 | Remove disabled and not loaded services before calling reset-failed and restart services (#2266) [Zain Budhwani]  
09b4678 2022-07-05 | [config/load_mgmt_config] Support load IPv6 mgmt IP (#2206) (#2246) [Jing Kan] 

How I did it

Pulled latest commit from 201911 sonic-utilities branch and created PR

How to verify it

Look at build-image
vivekrnv pushed a commit to vivekrnv/sonic-buildimage that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2022
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.

4 participants