You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Trying to understand if chassis based systems should have a third namespace type defined by the sub_role present in DEVICE_METADATA. This HLD clearly states all fabric ASICs in a chassis system environment are backend ASICs. Contrarily, this PR introduces a new concept of fabric_ns for each "Fabric" ASIC present on a VoQ system inside sonic-py-common/multi_asic.py. This is confusing and needs more clarity if the Fabric ASICs in a VoQ enabled supervisor of a chassis based system should have their sub_role as Fabric or BackEnd.
Current yang models for DEVICE_METADATA only mention two values available for sub_role
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Trying to understand if chassis based systems should have a third namespace type defined by the sub_role present in
DEVICE_METADATA. This HLD clearly states all fabric ASICs in a chassis system environment are backend ASICs. Contrarily, this PR introduces a new concept offabric_nsfor each "Fabric" ASIC present on a VoQ system insidesonic-py-common/multi_asic.py. This is confusing and needs more clarity if the Fabric ASICs in a VoQ enabled supervisor of a chassis based system should have their sub_role asFabricorBackEnd.Current yang models for
DEVICE_METADATAonly mention two values available forsub_roleBeta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions