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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Add route flow counter related test cases #5134
Add route flow counter related test cases #5134
Changes from 1 commit
5469367
dac195d
339e6a7
6238b27
5d6cc25
0d7cd5f
6f2fe3e
f9278f7
e2fe2d8
8e31615
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can't we simply return the variable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No. get_route_flow_counter_capability is a callback of wait_until, the return value indicates that whether wait_until need continue running. If we return the support_route_flow_counter, there could be case that: support_route_flow_counter is False and wait_until will continue running until timeout.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
how about raising an exception if the value is None? wait_until should return False in that case
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The semantic here is to "wait support_route_flow_counter until there is a value", so I support "return support_route_flow_counter is not None" just matches the semantic.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To me it seems more readable to get another parameter- VRF, rather than encapsulating it in the route pattern string
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Indeed, using VRF and prefix here makes this function more readable. However, I would like to keep this based on two reasons:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
here I suggest to exit the function only once(at the end), so we can set the rc and message when needed and return it at the end
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Prefer to keep this. There is a "for loop in for loop" in this function, it is hard to use rc in the inner loop.