-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 740
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
refactor: enhance override config masic test #16226
refactor: enhance override config masic test #16226
Conversation
/azp run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
@cyw233 Have we tested it on the non-chassis devices? |
Can confirm the change will not cause any regression on multi-asic T1 device: https://elastictest.org/scheduler/testplan/67763b01b9fbfafb6a51c1b5 |
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
Description of PR Enhance the override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py to make it compatible with the parallel run infra. Summary: Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122 Approach What is the motivation for this PR? We wanted to enable parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py, so we need to deprecate enum_upstream_dut_hostname. How did you do it? How did you verify/test it? I ran the updated code and can confirm it's working as expected. co-authorized by: [email protected]
Cherry-pick PR to 202411: #16310 |
Description of PR Enhance the override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py to make it compatible with the parallel run infra. Summary: Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122 Approach What is the motivation for this PR? We wanted to enable parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py, so we need to deprecate enum_upstream_dut_hostname. How did you do it? How did you verify/test it? I ran the updated code and can confirm it's working as expected. co-authorized by: [email protected]
Cherry-pick PR to 202405: #16311 |
Description of PR Enhance the override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py to make it compatible with the parallel run infra. Summary: Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122 Approach What is the motivation for this PR? We wanted to enable parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py, so we need to deprecate enum_upstream_dut_hostname. How did you do it? How did you verify/test it? I ran the updated code and can confirm it's working as expected. co-authorized by: [email protected]
Description of PR Enable parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py in 202405 Summary: Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122 Approach What is the motivation for this PR? Previously we disabled parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py in 202405 as it's not compatible with the existing infra. Now this test has been enhanced in #16226 so we can enable parallel run for it. co-authorized by: [email protected]
Description of PR Enhance the override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py to make it compatible with the parallel run infra. Summary: Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122 Approach What is the motivation for this PR? We wanted to enable parallel run for override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py, so we need to deprecate enum_upstream_dut_hostname. How did you do it? How did you verify/test it? I ran the updated code and can confirm it's working as expected. co-authorized by: [email protected]
Description of PR
Enhance the
override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py
to make it compatible with the parallel run infra.Summary:
Fixes # (issue) Microsoft ADO 30056122
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
We wanted to enable parallel run for
override_config_table/test_override_config_table_masic.py
, so we need to deprecateenum_upstream_dut_hostname
.How did you do it?
How did you verify/test it?
I ran the updated code and can confirm it's working as expected.
Any platform specific information?
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation