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

Skip pfcwd_all_port_storm test on Arista-7060X6-64PE-256x200G #14756

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 27, 2024

Conversation

Janetxxx
Copy link
Contributor

Description of PR

Summary: Skip pfcwd/test_pfcwd_all_port_storm.py test on Arista-7060X6-64PE-256x200G, the pfc generation function on the Arista fanout device need to be improved by Arista.
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

  • Bug fix
  • Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
  • Test case(new/improvement)

Back port request

  • 202012
  • 202205
  • 202305
  • 202311
  • 202405

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Currently, the test uses the python script to send the PFC frames, but the performance does not meet the requirements, and sometimes fails to trigger the PFC storm immediately. Slow pfc generation rate on 7060x6 200Gb.

How did you do it?

To address this, waiting for Arista to to improve the pfc generation function on the Arista fanout device. It would be better to use an Asic based pfc generation function.

How did you verify/test it?

======================================================================================== short test summary info =========================================================================================
SKIPPED [1] pfcwd/test_pfcwd_all_port_storm.py: Slow pfc generation rate on 7060x6 200Gb, pfc generation function on the Arista fanout device need to be improved by Arista
===================================================================================== 1 skipped, 1 warning in 29.87s =====================================================================================

Any platform specific information?

str3-7060x6-64pe-1

Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?

t0-standalone-32

Documentation

Signed-off-by: Janetxxx <janet970527@gmail.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@yutongzhang-microsoft yutongzhang-microsoft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@Janetxxx
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wangxin Could you please help to merge this PR, thanks

@wangxin wangxin merged commit e77e31a into sonic-net:master Sep 27, 2024
18 checks passed
arista-hpandya pushed a commit to arista-hpandya/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2024
hdwhdw pushed a commit to hdwhdw/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2024
vikshaw-Nokia pushed a commit to vikshaw-Nokia/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Oct 23, 2024
mssonicbld pushed a commit to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2024
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

Cherry-pick PR to 202405: #15902

mssonicbld pushed a commit to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2024
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

Cherry-pick PR to 202311: #15903

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