Add 128 SRv6 sids support #18775

echuawu · 2025-06-03T14:34:48Z

Description of PR

Including configuration and function coverage:

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids
2.Auto generate 128 matching packets
2.1.Test DIP shift
2.2.Test uSID container copy action
2.3.Test USD flavor
2.4.Test DSCP mapping
2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change
3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter
5.Test SRv6 CRM resource
6.Add static route for 128 sids validation
7.Add check for route asic db installation
8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids
10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type

This PR should be merged after the design PRs merged:

Summary:
Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

Enhance the SRv6 test coverage for the counter and CRM and 128 my sids

How did you do it?

Add validations for SRv6 counter and CRM and 128 my sids

How did you verify/test it?

Run it in local setup

Any platform specific information?

Mellanox SPC4 and later platforms

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

Documentation

BYGX-wcr

LGTM

r12f · 2025-06-03T15:56:33Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-03T15:56:39Z

Commenter does not have sufficient privileges for PR 18775 in repo sonic-net/sonic-mgmt

abdosi · 2025-06-03T15:58:33Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-03T15:58:47Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

BYGX-wcr · 2025-06-03T16:13:36Z

@echuawu, please check the formatting issue.

tests/srv6/test_srv6_dataplane.py

BYGX-wcr

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

echuawu · 2025-06-04T02:56:47Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions:
def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost):
config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts']
bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {})
pytest_assert(
wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors),
"bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors)
)

echuawu · 2025-06-04T04:12:53Z

@echuawu, please check the formatting issue.

Fixed

BYGX-wcr · 2025-06-04T04:51:40Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions: def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost): config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts'] bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {}) pytest_assert( wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors), "bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors) )

That is not sufficient. When I ran this in our lab, this function triggered a runtime error because the BGP daemon was not up yet when the duthost.check_bgp_session_state calls bgp_facts.

echuawu · 2025-06-04T04:54:37Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions: def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost): config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts'] bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {}) pytest_assert( wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors), "bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors) )

That is not sufficient. When I ran this in our lab, this function triggered a runtime error because the BGP daemon was not up yet when the duthost.check_bgp_session_state calls bgp_facts.

Do you have any suggestion on this check? Just do not use duthost.check_bgp_session_state?

echuawu · 2025-06-04T05:41:46Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions: def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost): config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts'] bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {}) pytest_assert( wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors), "bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors) )

That is not sufficient. When I ran this in our lab, this function triggered a runtime error because the BGP daemon was not up yet when the duthost.check_bgp_session_state calls bgp_facts.

Do you have any suggestion on this check? Just do not use duthost.check_bgp_session_state?

Before the _validate_bgp_session, there is a bgp service check, isn't it enough?

with allure.step('Validate BGP docker UP'):
                    pytest_assert(wait_until(100, 10, 0, rand_selected_dut.is_service_fully_started_per_asic_or_host,
                                             "bgp"),
                                  "BGP not started.")

BYGX-wcr · 2025-06-04T05:50:40Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions: def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost): config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts'] bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {}) pytest_assert( wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors), "bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors) )

That is not sufficient. When I ran this in our lab, this function triggered a runtime error because the BGP daemon was not up yet when the duthost.check_bgp_session_state calls bgp_facts.

Do you have any suggestion on this check? Just do not use duthost.check_bgp_session_state?

Before the _validate_bgp_session, there is a bgp service check, isn't it enough?
with allure.step('Validate BGP docker UP'):
                    pytest_assert(wait_until(100, 10, 0, rand_selected_dut.is_service_fully_started_per_asic_or_host,
                                             "bgp"),
                                  "BGP not started.")

at least not enough in our lab, you can skip checking BGP sessions and add more wait time for checking if the BGP routes are synced

echuawu · 2025-06-04T06:03:13Z

You should use wait_until to validate BGP sessions to avoid failures because BGP daemon not up in time.

There is wait_until during validation of bgp sessions: def _validate_bgp_session(self, duthost): config_facts = duthost.config_facts(host=duthost.hostname, source="running")['ansible_facts'] bgp_neighbors = config_facts.get('BGP_NEIGHBOR', {}) pytest_assert( wait_until(300, 10, 0, duthost.check_bgp_session_state, bgp_neighbors), "bgp sessions {} are not up".format(bgp_neighbors) )

That is not sufficient. When I ran this in our lab, this function triggered a runtime error because the BGP daemon was not up yet when the duthost.check_bgp_session_state calls bgp_facts.

Do you have any suggestion on this check? Just do not use duthost.check_bgp_session_state?

Before the _validate_bgp_session, there is a bgp service check, isn't it enough?
with allure.step('Validate BGP docker UP'):
                    pytest_assert(wait_until(100, 10, 0, rand_selected_dut.is_service_fully_started_per_asic_or_host,
                                             "bgp"),
                                  "BGP not started.")
at least not enough in our lab, you can skip checking BGP sessions and add more wait time for checking if the BGP routes are synced

Updated, please review.

tests/srv6/conftest.py

mssonicbld · 2025-06-06T03:36:13Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-06T03:36:27Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type

mssonicbld · 2025-06-06T03:47:01Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-06T03:47:14Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

BYGX-wcr

LGTM

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-09T04:45:45Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

echuawu · 2025-06-09T07:32:47Z

/azpw run

mssonicbld · 2025-06-09T07:32:49Z

/AzurePipelines run

azure-pipelines · 2025-06-09T07:33:01Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

r12f · 2025-06-11T00:03:23Z

hi @echuawu , do you mind to help manual picking this change to 202412?

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type

mssonicbld · 2025-06-12T04:40:06Z

Cherry-pick PR to 202505: #18945

echuawu · 2025-06-12T07:56:30Z

hi @echuawu , do you mind to help manual picking this change to 202412?

Please check Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#396

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type

### Description of PR 1.Add more timeout for ptf to handle a large scale of bgp packets after config reload/bgp restart/reboot 2.Add BGP route sync check This PR would based on the sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#18775 Summary: Fixes # (issue) ### Type of change  - [ ] Bug fix - [ ] Testbed and Framework(new/improvement) - [ ] New Test case - [ ] Skipped for non-supported platforms - [x] Test case improvement ### Back port request - [ ] 202205 - [ ] 202305 - [ ] 202311 - [ ] 202405 - [ ] 202411 - [ ] 202505 ### Approach #### What is the motivation for this PR? Case not stable #### How did you do it? 1.Add more timeout for ptf to handle a large scale of bgp packets after config reload/bgp restart/reboot 2.Add BGP route sync check #### How did you verify/test it? Run it in local setup #### Any platform specific information? #### Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? ### Documentation

… srv6 test cases (#511)  ### Description of PR 1.Add more timeout for ptf to handle a large scale of bgp packets after config reload/bgp restart/reboot 2.Add BGP route sync check This PR would based on the sonic-net/sonic-mgmt#18775 Summary: Fixes # (issue) ### Type of change  - [ ] Bug fix - [ ] Testbed and Framework(new/improvement) - [ ] New Test case - [ ] Skipped for non-supported platforms - [x] Test case improvement ### Back port request - [ ] 202205 - [ ] 202305 - [ ] 202311 - [ ] 202405 - [ ] 202411 - [ ] 202505 ### Approach #### What is the motivation for this PR? Case not stable #### How did you do it? 1.Add more timeout for ptf to handle a large scale of bgp packets after config reload/bgp restart/reboot 2.Add BGP route sync check #### How did you verify/test it? Run it in local setup #### Any platform specific information? #### Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case? ### Documentation

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type Signed-off-by: opcoder0 <[email protected]>

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type Signed-off-by: Aharon Malkin <[email protected]>

1.Auto generate 128 SRv6 locators and sids 2.Auto generate 128 matching packets 2.1.Test DIP shift 2.2.Test uSID container copy action 2.3.Test USD flavor 2.4.Test DSCP mapping 2.5.Test ttl and hop limit change 3.Split SRH and non SRH packets test into two test cases required by MSFT 3.1.Test reboot and BGP restart test randomly to save time 4.Test SRv6 counter 5.Test SRv6 CRM resource 6.Add static route for 128 sids validation 7.Add check for route asic db installation 8.Add timeout when captureing packet to override large scale of BGP update packets affection 9.Use a unified locator block for all the sids 10.Use command line to set SRv6 packet type Signed-off-by: Guy Shemesh <[email protected]>

echuawu mentioned this pull request Jun 3, 2025

SRv6 dataplane test for counter and crm and 128 my sids #18173

Closed

11 tasks

r12f approved these changes Jun 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

BYGX-wcr approved these changes Jun 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

BYGX-wcr reviewed Jun 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/srv6/test_srv6_dataplane.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

BYGX-wcr suggested changes Jun 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

echuawu force-pushed the pr-18173 branch from c3f3e2f to 4f39654 Compare June 4, 2025 03:57

echuawu force-pushed the pr-18173 branch from 4f39654 to 5fbe67e Compare June 4, 2025 06:01

BYGX-wcr reviewed Jun 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

tests/srv6/conftest.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

echuawu force-pushed the pr-18173 branch from 5fbe67e to 4a93c2b Compare June 6, 2025 03:36

echuawu force-pushed the pr-18173 branch from 4a93c2b to 2cd087f Compare June 6, 2025 03:46

BYGX-wcr approved these changes Jun 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

BYGX-wcr added the Request for msft-202412 Branch label Jun 6, 2025

nhe-NV added the Request for 202505 branch label Jun 8, 2025

echuawu mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2025

Enhance PTF and BGP route sync validation of msft srv6 test cases #18866

Merged

11 tasks

abdosi approved these changes Jun 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

abdosi enabled auto-merge (squash) June 9, 2025 16:48

abdosi merged commit 44bd8ce into sonic-net:master Jun 10, 2025
19 checks passed

yejianquan added the Approved for 202505 branch label Jun 12, 2025

mssonicbld added the Created PR to 202505 branch label Jun 12, 2025

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2025

[action] [PR:18775] Add 128 SRv6 sids support #18945

Merged

11 tasks

r12f added Approved for msft-202412 Branch Included in msft-202412 Branch and removed Cherry Pick Conflict_msft-202412 labels Jun 14, 2025

mssonicbld added the Cherry Pick Conflict_msft-202412 label Jun 14, 2025

mssonicbld added Included in 202505 branch and removed Created PR to 202505 branch labels Jun 14, 2025

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2025

[action] [PR:18866] Enhance PTF and BGP route sync validation of msft srv6 test cases #19440

Merged

11 tasks

mssonicbld mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2025

[action] [PR:18866] Enhance PTF and BGP route sync validation of msft srv6 test cases Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#511

Merged

11 tasks

Add 128 SRv6 sids support #18775

Add 128 SRv6 sids support #18775

Uh oh!

Conversation

echuawu commented Jun 3, 2025

Description of PR

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

How did you do it?

How did you verify/test it?

Any platform specific information?

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

Documentation

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

r12f commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

abdosi commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jun 6, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 6, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jun 6, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 6, 2025

Uh oh!

BYGX-wcr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines bot commented Jun 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

r12f commented Jun 11, 2025

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented Jun 12, 2025

Uh oh!

echuawu commented Jun 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

BYGX-wcr left a comment •

edited

Loading