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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Mellanox] Update spf test related to error status when sw control is enabled #16573

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[Mellanox] Update spf test related to error status when sw control is enabled #16573

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

JibinBao
Copy link
Contributor

Description of PR

Update spf platform test related to error status, due to PR: sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#20964
When software control is enabled, the port error status is as follows:

  1. For active module, the expected state is OK
  2. For cmis passive module, the expected state is ModuleLowPwr
  3. For non cmis passive module, the expected state is 'Not supported'

When software control is disabled, the port error status keeps the original behaviour

Summary:
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

  • Bug fix
  • Testbed and Framework(new/improvement)
  • New Test case
  • Skipped for non-supported platforms
  • Test case improvement

Back port request

  • 202012
  • 202205
  • 202305
  • 202311
  • 202405
  • 202411

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Update spf test related to error status when sw control is enabled

How did you do it?

When sw control is enabled, check the error stats as the following logic:

  1. For active module, the expected state is OK
  2. For cmis passive module, the expected state is ModuleLowPwr
  3. For non cmis passive module, the expected state is 'Not supported'

How did you verify/test it?

Run test_get_error_description and test_check_sfputil_error_status when sw control is enabled

Any platform specific information?

Mellanox

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

Documentation

@JibinBao JibinBao requested a review from prgeor as a code owner January 17, 2025 09:18
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run

@azure-pipelines Azure Pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@JibinBao
Update spf platform test related to error status, due to sonic-net/so…
5ce252f 
…nic-buildimage#20964

When software control is enabled, the port error status is as follows:
1. For active module, the expected state is OK
2. For cmis passive module, the expected state is ModuleLowPwr
3. For non cmis passive module, the expected state is 'Not supported'

when software control is disabled, the port error status keep the original behaviour
@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run

@azure-pipelines Azure Pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run

@azure-pipelines Azure Pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/azp run

@azure-pipelines Azure Pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@JibinBao
Copy link
Contributor Author

/azpw run Azure.sonic-mgmt

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run Azure.sonic-mgmt

@azure-pipelines Azure Pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@bingwang-ms
Copy link
Collaborator

@prgeor Could you help review?

@bingwang-ms
Copy link
Collaborator

We saw the returned error description is Unknown for some module when sw_control is enabled

admin@str3-msn4700-02:~$ sudo sfputil show error-status --fetch-from-hardware
Port         Error Status
-----------  --------------
Ethernet0    Unknown

admin@str3-msn4700-02:~$ sudo sfputil show eeprom -d -p Ethernet0
Ethernet0: SFP EEPROM detected
        Active App Selection Host Lane 1: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 2: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 3: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 4: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 5: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 6: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 7: N/A
        Active App Selection Host Lane 8: N/A
        Application Advertisement: 400G CR8 - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   200GBASE-CR4 (Clause 136) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   100GBASE-CR2 (Clause 136) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   50GBASE-CR (Clause 126) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   100GBASE-CR4 (Clause 92) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   25GBASE-CR CA-N (Clause 110) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   25GBASE-CR CA-S (Clause 110) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
                                   25GBASE-CR CA-L (Clause 110) - Host Assign (0x1) - Copper cable - Media Assign (Unknown)
        CMIS Revision: 5.0
        Connector: No separable connector
        Encoding: N/A
        Extended Identifier: Power Class 1 (0.25W Max)
        Extended RateSelect Compliance: N/A
        Hardware Revision: 0.0
        Host Electrical Interface: N/A
        Host Lane Assignment Options: 1
        Host Lane Count: 8
        Identifier: QSFP-DD Double Density 8X Pluggable Transceiver
        Length Cable Assembly(m): 1.0
        Media Interface Code: Copper cable
        Media Interface Technology: Copper cable unequalized
        Media Lane Assignment Options: N/A
        Media Lane Count: 0
        Nominal Bit Rate(100Mbs): 0
        Specification compliance: passive_copper_media_interface
        Vendor Date Code(YYYY-MM-DD Lot): 2023-06-25   
        Vendor Name: Amphenol        
        Vendor OUI: 78-a7-14
        Vendor PN: NDYYYS-M201     
        Vendor Rev: A 
        Vendor SN: APF23232016YUY  
DOM values not supported for flat memory module

Can this change handle such case?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@prgeor prgeor Awaiting requested review from prgeor prgeor is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Request for 202405 branch Request for 202411 branch
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@JibinBao @mssonicbld @bingwang-ms @nhe-NV