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

Comment out tx power validation check and program the passed value #389

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 28, 2023

Conversation

abdosi
Copy link
Contributor

@abdosi abdosi commented Jul 26, 2023

What I did:

Comment out tx power validation check and program the passed value to eeprom write function

MSFT ADO: 17893499

Why I did:

For some of our 400G ZR optics calibrated value of tx power is not in min and max range of advertised value which causes xcvrd to crash and then links do not come up . This fix is short term solution to skip the validation check.

How I verify:
After this change not seeing xcvrd crash.

if tx_power > max_prog_tx_output_power or tx_power < min_prog_tx_output_power:
raise ValueError('Provisioned TX power out of range. Max: %.1f; Min: %.1f dBm.'
%(max_prog_tx_output_power, min_prog_tx_output_power))
#Comment out validation for now.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@abdosi can you remove the code itself?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@prgeor updated.

@prgeor prgeor merged commit c99d311 into sonic-net:master Jul 28, 2023
@gechiang
Copy link

MSFT ADO: 24669442

@gechiang
Copy link

gechiang commented Aug 1, 2023

@yxieca , @StormLiangMS , can you help cherry-pick this bug fix to the needed branches accordingly?
Thanks!

StormLiangMS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2023
)

* Comment out power validation check and program the passed value to the
eeprom write function.

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dosi <[email protected]>

* Update c_cmis.py

---------

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dosi <[email protected]>
@gechiang
Copy link

gechiang commented Aug 8, 2023

@yxieca, please let us know if this can be cherry-picked cleanly into 202205. If not, we will have to raise a 202205 specific PR for it...
If you do not feel this bug fix should be part of 202205, let us know as well so we can pick into the MSFT repo if it will not be picked into 202205
Thanks!

yxieca pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2023
)

* Comment out power validation check and program the passed value to the
eeprom write function.

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dosi <[email protected]>

* Update c_cmis.py

---------

Signed-off-by: Abhishek Dosi <[email protected]>
@gechiang
Copy link

gechiang commented Sep 6, 2023

@yxieca , can you also approve this for 202211 so we can mark the ADO as complete. Thanks!

oleksandrivantsiv pushed a commit to oleksandrivantsiv/sonic-platform-common that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2024
* Fixes for the following issues:

	- Lack of getKeys() impl in mock swsscommon table class in sonic-pcied
	- Fixed a 'set' bug in pcied that was uncovered by new code flows

* Removed mocked table instances per prgeor review comments
oleksandrivantsiv pushed a commit to oleksandrivantsiv/sonic-platform-common that referenced this pull request Oct 25, 2024
* Revert "Fixes for the issues uncovered by sonic-pcied unit tests (sonic-net#389)"

This reverts commit 76baca3.

* Revert "Added PCIe transaction check for all peripherals on the bus (sonic-net#331)"

This reverts commit d73808c.

* Fixes for the issues uncovered by sonic-pcied unit tests (sonic-net#389)

* Fixes for the following issues:

	- Lack of getKeys() impl in mock swsscommon table class in sonic-pcied
	- Fixed a 'set' bug in pcied that was uncovered by new code flows

* Removed mocked table instances per prgeor review comments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants