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

[Reclaiming buffer] Support reclaiming buffer in traditional model #2011

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 22, 2021

Conversation

stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator

@stephenxs stephenxs commented Nov 5, 2021

What I did
It's to port #1837 to master.
To reclaim reserved buffer.
As the way to do it differs among vendors, buffermgrd will:

  • Handle port admin down on Mellanox platform.
    • Not apply lossless buffer PG to an admin-down port
    • Remove lossless buffer PG (3-4) from a port when it is shut down.
  • Read lossless buffer PG (3-4) to a port when a port is started up.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Sun stephens@nvidia.com

Why I did it
To support reclaiming reserved buffer when a port is shut down on Mellanox platform in traditional buffer model.

How I verified it
sonic-mgmt test and vs test.

Details if related

It's to port the changes in 201911 to master

Signed-off-by: Stephen Sun <stephens@nvidia.com>
keboliu
keboliu previously approved these changes Nov 15, 2021
@neethajohn
Copy link
Contributor

@stephenxs , can you please add a vs test for this change?

@stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@stephenxs , can you please add a vs test for this change?

hi @neethajohn
two changes in this PR

  • for Mellanox platform, remove lossless pg on admin down ports, which can not be verified on vs platform
  • generic minor change for all platforms, which is covered by current vs test
    So we don’t need new vs test for the PR.
    How do you think?

cfgmgr/buffermgr.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Stephen Sun <stephens@nvidia.com>
@stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@stephenxs
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/azpw run

@mssonicbld
Copy link
Collaborator

/AzurePipelines run

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

@liat-grozovik liat-grozovik merged commit 4f6cb05 into sonic-net:master Nov 22, 2021
@stephenxs stephenxs deleted the reclaim-buffer-traditional branch November 22, 2021 09:50
liat-grozovik pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 7, 2021
…buffer model (#2063)

- What I did
It's to port #2011 to 202012
To reclaim reserved buffer.
As the way to do it differs among vendors, buffermgrd will:

1. Handle port admin down on Mellanox platform.
   - Not apply lossless buffer PG to an admin-down port
   - Remove lossless buffer PG (3-4) from a port when it is shut down.
2. Read lossless buffer PG (3-4) to a port when a port is started up.

- Why I did it
To support reclaiming reserved buffer when a port is shut down on Mellanox platform in traditional buffer model.

- How I verified it
Regression test and vs test.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Sun stephens@nvidia.com
EdenGri pushed a commit to EdenGri/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2022
Fix the ro command rw permission required issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants