fix(anta.tests): VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes #965

geetanjalimanegslab · 2024-12-13T08:19:17Z

Description

Refactoring PathSelection (VerifySpecificPath) tests module to address the following issues:

Checklist:

My code follows the style guidelines of this project
I have performed a self-review of my code
I have run pre-commit for code linting and typing (pre-commit run)
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes (tox -e testenv)

codspeed-hq · 2024-12-13T08:34:23Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #965 will not alter performance

_{Comparing geetanjalimanegslab:feat_verify_route_path (ce300b8) with main (164b736)}

Summary

✅ 22 untouched benchmarks

anta/tests/path_selection.py

gmuloc · 2025-01-07T09:30:38Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py


-    The expected states are 'IPsec established', 'Resolved' for path and 'active' for telemetry.
+    This test performs the following checks for each specified router path:


Suggested change

This test performs the following checks for each specified router path:

This test performs the following checks for each specified DPS path:

gmuloc · 2025-01-07T09:31:00Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

+
+        1. Verifies that the specified peer is configured.
+        2. Verifies that the specified path group is found.
+        3. Verifies that the expected source and destination address match the path group.


What do you mean?

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T14:55:34Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

+
+        # If the dpsPeers details are not found in the command output, the test fails.
+        if not (dps_peers_details := get_value(command_output, "dpsPeers")):
+            self.result.is_failure("Router path not configured")


Suggested change

self.result.is_failure("Router path not configured")

self.result.is_failure("Router path-selection not configured")

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T14:55:55Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

+            self.result.is_failure("Router path not configured")
+            return
+
+        # Iterating on each router path mentioned in the inputs.


Suggested change

# Iterating on each router path mentioned in the inputs.

# Iterating on each DPS peer mentioned in the inputs.

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T14:56:32Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

-    commands: ClassVar[list[AntaCommand | AntaTemplate]] = [
-        AntaTemplate(template="show path-selection paths peer {peer} path-group {group} source {source} destination {destination}", revision=1)
-    ]
+    commands: ClassVar[list[AntaCommand | AntaTemplate]] = [AntaCommand(command="show path-selection paths", revision=1)]

    class Input(AntaTest.Input):
        """Input model for the VerifySpecificPath test."""

        paths: list[RouterPath]


Suggested change

paths: list[RouterPath]

paths: list[DpsPath]

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T15:01:28Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

+            path_data = next((path for path in path_group_details.values() if (path.get("source") == source and path.get("destination") == destination)), None)
+            # If the expected and actual source and destination address of the path group are not matched, test fails.
+            if not path_data:
+                self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Path not found")


Suggested change

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Path not found")

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - No path matching the source and destination found.")

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T15:02:01Z

anta/input_models/path_selection.py

+
+    def __str__(self) -> str:
+        """Return a human-readable string representation of the RouterPath for reporting."""
+        return f"Peer: {self.peer} PathGroup: {self.path_group} Source: {self.source_address} Destination: {self.destination_address}"


Suggested change

return f"Peer: {self.peer} PathGroup: {self.path_group} Source: {self.source_address} Destination: {self.destination_address}"

return f"Peer: {self.peer}, PathGroup: {self.path_group}, Source: {self.source_address}, Destination: {self.destination_address}"

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T15:03:19Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py


+            path_state = path_data.get("state")
+            session = get_value(path_data, "dpsSessions.0.active")
+            expected_state = ["ipsecEstablished", "routeResolved"]


do you need this variable? why not just put it directly in line 153?

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T15:03:55Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

-            if path_state not in ["ipsecEstablished", "routeResolved"]:
-                self.result.is_failure(f"Path state for `peer: {peer} source: {source} destination: {destination}` in path-group {path_group} is `{path_state}`.")
+            if path_state not in expected_state:
+                self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - State is not in ipsecEstablished, routeResolved - Actual: {path_state}")


Suggested change

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - State is not in ipsecEstablished, routeResolved - Actual: {path_state}")

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - State is not in ipsecEstablished, routeResolved. Actual: {path_state}")

gmuloc · 2025-01-14T15:04:21Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

-                self.result.is_failure(
-                    f"Telemetry state for path `peer: {peer} source: {source} destination: {destination}` in path-group {path_group} is `inactive`."
-                )
+                self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Telemetry state inactive")


Suggested change

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Telemetry state inactive")

self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Telemetry state inactive for this path")

github-actions · 2025-01-15T14:47:11Z

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

github-actions · 2025-01-15T14:58:31Z

Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly.

gmuloc · 2025-01-21T21:54:28Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py


    Expected Results
    ----------------
-    * Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path-selection is either 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved'
+    * Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path selection is either 'IPsecEstablished' or 'Resolved'


Suggested change

* Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path selection is either 'IPsecEstablished' or 'Resolved'

* Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path-selection is either 'IPsecEstablished' or 'Resolved'

gmuloc · 2025-01-21T21:54:42Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

               and telemetry state as 'active'.
-    * Failure: The test will fail if router path-selection is not configured or if the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',
-               or if the telemetry state is 'inactive'.
+    * Failure: The test will fail if router path selection is not configured, the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',


Suggested change

* Failure: The test will fail if router path selection is not configured, the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',

* Failure: The test will fail if router path selection or the peer is not configured or if the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',

gmuloc · 2025-01-21T21:57:41Z

anta/tests/path_selection.py

-        return [
-            template.render(peer=path.peer, group=path.path_group, source=path.source_address, destination=path.destination_address) for path in self.inputs.paths
-        ]
+        DpsPath: ClassVar[type[DpsPath]] = DpsPath


Suggested change

DpsPath: ClassVar[type[DpsPath]] = DpsPath

RouterPath: ClassVar[type[DpsPath]] = DpsPath

"""To maintain backward compatibility."""

sonarqubecloud · 2025-01-22T11:58:32Z

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

github-actions bot assigned geetanjalimanegslab Dec 13, 2024

vitthalmagadum requested review from vitthalmagadum and MaheshGSLAB December 16, 2024 06:36

vitthalmagadum mentioned this pull request Dec 16, 2024

Enhancement: Input subclasses refactoring #388

Open

32 tasks

gmuloc added this to the v1.3.0 milestone Dec 24, 2024

vitthalmagadum requested changes Dec 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

geetanjalimanegslab requested a review from vitthalmagadum December 26, 2024 11:22

vitthalmagadum approved these changes Dec 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

vitthalmagadum marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2025 09:11

vitthalmagadum requested review from gmuloc and carl-baillargeon January 7, 2025 09:11

gmuloc requested changes Jan 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

github-actions bot added the state: conflict label Jan 15, 2025

geetanjalimanegslab marked this pull request as draft January 15, 2025 14:48

geetanjalimanegslab force-pushed the feat_verify_route_path branch from d15bc0b to 85a60fa Compare January 15, 2025 14:58

github-actions bot removed the state: conflict label Jan 15, 2025

geetanjalimanegslab and others added 6 commits January 15, 2025 15:18

Updated VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes

8217d07

Updated test failure messages, documenation

2c5bb7d

Updated test failure messages

50a4abf

Updated test.yaml file

d96a749

Fixed documenation issue

111bf9c

Updated docstrings and test failures messages

d1351c3

geetanjalimanegslab force-pushed the feat_verify_route_path branch from 79be309 to d1351c3 Compare January 15, 2025 15:31

vitthalmagadum marked this pull request as ready for review January 15, 2025 16:21

geetanjalimanegslab requested a review from gmuloc January 16, 2025 00:44

Merge branch 'main' into feat_verify_route_path

d4b9c49

gmuloc requested changes Jan 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

Updated docstrings

ce300b8

geetanjalimanegslab requested a review from gmuloc January 22, 2025 12:14

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix(anta.tests): VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes #965

fix(anta.tests): VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes #965

geetanjalimanegslab commented Dec 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

gmuloc Jan 7, 2025

gmuloc Jan 7, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

gmuloc Jan 14, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2025

gmuloc Jan 21, 2025

gmuloc Jan 21, 2025

gmuloc Jan 21, 2025

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 22, 2025


		The expected states are 'IPsec established', 'Resolved' for path and 'active' for telemetry.
		This test performs the following checks for each specified router path:

	self.result.is_failure("Router path not configured")
	self.result.is_failure("Router path-selection not configured")

	# Iterating on each router path mentioned in the inputs.
	# Iterating on each DPS peer mentioned in the inputs.

	self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - Path not found")
	self.result.is_failure(f"{router_path} - No path matching the source and destination found.")

	return f"Peer: {self.peer} PathGroup: {self.path_group} Source: {self.source_address} Destination: {self.destination_address}"
	return f"Peer: {self.peer}, PathGroup: {self.path_group}, Source: {self.source_address}, Destination: {self.destination_address}"

	* Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path selection is either 'IPsecEstablished' or 'Resolved'
	* Success: The test will pass if the path state under router path-selection is either 'IPsecEstablished' or 'Resolved'

	* Failure: The test will fail if router path selection is not configured, the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',
	* Failure: The test will fail if router path selection or the peer is not configured or if the path state is not 'IPsec established' or 'Resolved',

	DpsPath: ClassVar[type[DpsPath]] = DpsPath
	RouterPath: ClassVar[type[DpsPath]] = DpsPath
	"""To maintain backward compatibility."""

fix(anta.tests): VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes #965

Are you sure you want to change the base?

fix(anta.tests): VerifySpecificPath testcase with the latest changes #965

Conversation

geetanjalimanegslab commented Dec 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Description

Checklist:

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Merging #965 will not alter performance

Summary

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2025

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jan 22, 2025

Quality Gate passed

geetanjalimanegslab commented Dec 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading