Adding support for copying socat to the DUTs. by rraghav-cisco · Pull Request #24525 · sonic-net/sonic-mgmt

rraghav-cisco · 2026-05-11T17:54:44Z

Copy of #23595 since it is messed up.

Description of PR

Sometimes the console script execute the "socat" command in dut or console-fanout. But the socat executable is not copied to the hosts. This fixture is to copy the socat from tests/console/socat to the DUTs and console-fanouts.

Summary:
Fixes issues where socat is needed, but not yet available in the fanouts.

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

The tests execute socat without copyting the required executable.

How did you do it?

Added a new fixture to the console/conftest.py folder.

How did you verify/test it?

Ran a couple of tests:

-- Docs: https://docs.pytest.org/en/stable/how-to/capture-warnings.html
====================================================================================================================== PASSES =======================================================================================================================
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ test_console_link_wiring[115200-40] ________________________________________________________________________________________________________
----------------------------------------- generated xml file: /run_logs/tb3/copy-socat/2026-04-03-02-41-42/console/test_console_link_wiring.py::test_console_link_wiring[115200-40]_2026-04-03-02-41-42.xml -----------------------------------------
INFO:root:Can not get Allure report URL. Please check logs
============================================================================================================== short test summary info ==============================================================================================================
PASSED console/test_console_link_wiring.py::test_console_link_wiring[115200-40]
===================================================================================================== 1 passed, 1 warning in 215.98s (0:03:35) ======================================================================================================
sonic@arctos_cicd_TB3_double_console_202511:/data/tests$

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

mssonicbld · 2026-05-11T18:39:06Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2026-05-11T18:39:22Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

mssonicbld · 2026-05-12T11:25:44Z

This PR has backport request for branch(es): 202511.
Added label(s) for branch(es) 202511.

_{---Powered by SONiC BuildBot}

Xichen96

Naming nit on the new fixture — see inline.

Xichen96 · 2026-05-13T11:03:53Z

+
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope="module", autouse=True)
+def prepare_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):


Fixture name prepare_hosts is too generic — at a glance it reads like a topology fixture, not a binary-install one. Could you rename so the name carries the side-effect, and include the c0 scope (consistent with setup_c0 in this file)?

Suggested change

def prepare_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):

def install_socat_on_c0_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):

This will surface in pytest's setup/teardown logs; being explicit there helps when triaging.

Xichen96

A few more nits while you're touching this - low priority, but cheap wins.

Xichen96 · 2026-05-13T11:12:27Z

+            f"Couldnot find the console fanout for the DUT:{duthost}. "
+            "Pls fix the ansible files, there should be atleast one "
+            "console fanout.")


Few typos that'd be worth cleaning up since this message lands verbatim in lab triage tickets and pytest failure output:

Couldnot -> Could not

Pls -> Please

atleast -> at least

Suggested change

f"Couldnot find the console fanout for the DUT:{duthost}. "

"Pls fix the ansible files, there should be atleast one "

"console fanout.")

f"Could not find the console fanout for the DUT:{duthost}. "

"Please fix the ansible files, there should be at least one "

"console fanout.")

Xichen96 · 2026-05-13T11:12:28Z

-                    .format(len(console_facts["lines"])))
-
-    return duthost, console_fanout
+    if console_fanout is None:


Optional, low-priority structural cleanup: the trailing if console_fanout is None: pytest.fail(...) block (lines 63-67) is dead code. The if/elif/else above already exhausts every case - each branch either assigns console_fanout or calls pytest.fail(). The check exists only to silence the CodeQL false positive on line 52 (console_fanout = None).

An early-return shape lets the analyzer see exhaustion naturally - no console_fanout = None init and no defensive trailing block needed:

def get_console_fanout(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo): if tbinfo["topo"]["name"] == "c0": console_fanouts = list(filter( lambda fh: fh.get_fanout_os() == 'sonic' and fh.is_console_switch(), fanouthosts.values())) if len(console_fanouts) != 1: pytest.fail(...) # keep existing message return console_fanouts[0] if tbinfo["topo"]["name"] == "c0-lo": return duthost pytest.fail("Test requires c0 or c0-lo topology")

Leaving as a discussion point - pushing back is reasonable since CodeQL is already satisfied with the current shape.

Xichen96 · 2026-05-13T11:12:28Z

+        assert host.shell("socat -V", module_ignore_errors=True)["rc"] == 0, \
+            f"socat installation failed on DUT host:{host}"


sonic-mgmt convention in fixtures/tests is pytest_assert (from tests.common.helpers.assertions) rather than the built-in assert - it formats failures more consistently with the rest of the suite:

Suggested change

assert host.shell("socat -V", module_ignore_errors=True)["rc"] == 0, \

f"socat installation failed on DUT host:{host}"

pytest_assert(

host.shell("socat -V", module_ignore_errors=True)["rc"] == 0,

f"socat installation failed on DUT host:{host}")

Will also need from tests.common.helpers.assertions import pytest_assert at the top of the file (doesn't look like it's imported yet).

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

mssonicbld · 2026-05-13T16:22:34Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2026-05-13T16:22:49Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

mssonicbld · 2026-05-13T16:31:45Z

/azp run

azure-pipelines · 2026-05-13T16:32:06Z

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

lizhijianrd · 2026-05-14T12:06:14Z

I'm considering we no longer need to copy socat to DUT after this PR is backport to 202603: sonic-net/sonic-buildimage#25525

Adding support for copying socat to the DUTs.

64bbea0

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

github-actions Bot requested review from Xichen96, wsycqyz and xwjiang-ms May 11, 2026 17:55

github-advanced-security AI found potential problems May 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread tests/console/conftest.py Fixed

rraghav-cisco mentioned this pull request May 11, 2026

Adding a fixture to make sure socat is copied to all the duts and con… #23595

Closed

12 tasks

Fixing the codeQL error.

03f024b

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

mssonicbld added the Request for 202511 branch Request to backport a change to 202511 branch label May 12, 2026

Xichen96 requested changes May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Xichen96 reviewed May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Change new fixture's name to the suggested value.

6b624f2

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>

github-actions Bot requested a review from Xichen96 May 13, 2026 16:22

Implement other review comments.

8050a4a

Signed-off-by: Raghavendran Ramanathan <rraghav@cisco.com>



		@pytest.fixture(scope="module", autouse=True)
		def prepare_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):

	def prepare_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):
	def install_socat_on_c0_hosts(duthost, fanouthosts, tbinfo):

		assert host.shell("socat -V", module_ignore_errors=True)["rc"] == 0, \
		f"socat installation failed on DUT host:{host}"

Conversation

rraghav-cisco commented May 11, 2026

Description of PR

Type of change

Back port request

Approach

What is the motivation for this PR?

How did you do it?

How did you verify/test it?

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented May 11, 2026

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines Bot commented May 11, 2026

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented May 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Xichen96 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Xichen96 May 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Xichen96 left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines Bot commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

mssonicbld commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

azure-pipelines Bot commented May 13, 2026

Uh oh!

lizhijianrd commented May 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

Xichen96 left a comment •

edited

Loading

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Xichen96 May 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading