configlet/test_add_rack.py Add comparison ignore for extra entries added by generic patcher#21143
Merged
StormLiangMS merged 1 commit intosonic-net:masterfrom Jan 29, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
/azp run Azure.sonic-mgmt |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
Collaborator
|
@vaibhavhd could you help to take a look? |
davidm-arista
added
Request for msft-202412 Branch
Request for msft-202503 Branch
Request for 202505 branch
Request for 202511 branch
r12f
approved these changes
Dec 11, 2025
Contributor
|
hi @prgeor do you mind to help check this issue and confirm the PR change? https://github.com/aristanetworks/sonic-qual.msft/issues/895 all extra fields should be optics related in my understanding. |
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing.
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202511: #22162 |
12 tasks
12 tasks
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to msft-202412: Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#977 |
mssonicbld
added
Included in msft-202412 Branch
and removed
Created PR to msft-202412 Branch
labels
ytzur1
pushed a commit
to ytzur1/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: Yael Tzur <ytzur@nvidia.com>
vmittal-msft
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2026
) (#22162) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Co-authored-by: Justin Wong <51811017+justin-wong-ce@users.noreply.github.com>
abhishek-nexthop
pushed a commit
to nexthop-ai/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 6, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing.
Anirudh-nokia
pushed a commit
to Anirudh-nokia/sonic-mgmt-fork
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 6, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: ayya <anirudh.ayya@nokia.com>
Contributor
Author
|
Still needs a cherrypick to msft-202503 and 202505 |
lakshmi-nexthop
pushed a commit
to lakshmi-nexthop/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2026
…ic-net#21143) (sonic-net#22162) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Co-authored-by: Justin Wong <51811017+justin-wong-ce@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Lakshmi Yarramaneni <lakshmi@nexthop.ai>
nnelluri-cisco
pushed a commit
to nnelluri-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: nnelluri-cisco <nnelluri@cisco.com>
rraghav-cisco
pushed a commit
to rraghav-cisco/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>
12 tasks
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to msft-202503: Azure/sonic-mgmt.msft#1028 |
mssonicbld
added
Included in msft-202503 Branch
and removed
Created PR to msft-202503 Branch
labels
anilal-amd
pushed a commit
to anilal-amd/anilal-forked-sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: Zhuohui Tan <zhuohui.tan@amd.com>
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
to mssonicbld/sonic-mgmt
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2026
…ic-net#21143) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: mssonicbld <sonicbld@microsoft.com>
Collaborator
|
Cherry-pick PR to 202505: #22492 |
12 tasks
mssonicbld
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2026
) What is the motivation for this PR? configlet/test_add_rack.py is failing. How did you do it? Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by config apply-patch. Again, ideally this should be fixed in config apply-patch code. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used. How did you verify/test it? Test no longer fails Any platform specific information? Broadcom platform is used for testing. Signed-off-by: mssonicbld <sonicbld@microsoft.com>
mssonicbld
added
Included in 202505 branch
and removed
Created PR to 202505 branch
labels
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description of PR
Summary:
When patching the DUT to remove t0 peers, the test fails the DB comparison due to extra entries being added to APP_DB.
These entries only get added when generic patcher in SONiC (
config apply-patch) is used to remove t0 from the DUT.Ideally this should be fixed in
config apply-patchcode. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used.Fixes # (issue)
Type of change
Back port request
Approach
What is the motivation for this PR?
configlet/test_add_rack.pyis failing.How did you do it?
Adding extra entries to ignore. These entries seems to be harmless and not used. However it is not understood why it is being added by
config apply-patch.Again, ideally this should be fixed in
config apply-patchcode. This PR is a workaround for the issue since the extra entries are harmless and does not get used.How did you verify/test it?
Test no longer fails
Any platform specific information?
Broadcom platform is used for testing.
Supported testbed topology if it's a new test case?
Documentation