-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 285
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
[vs] Initialization of VOQ switch objects #702
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
03dbeb0
[vstest]SAI emulation for voq switch init
129c61f
[vs]VOQ Switch initialization
99189b4
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into voq-vstest-pr6
259a851
[vs]VOQ Switch Initialization
9937954
[vs]VOQ Switch Initialization
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
ok, this looks better, but i would like you to make 1 more change, so i think it would be actually better to propagate those count/list to parameters initialize_default_objects() function, and call voq initialize inside initialize_devault_objects, this way we will have initialization part in 1 single function, what do you think?
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 issue in doing what you are proposing. However, here the voq objects are not defaults. They are configured attributes. Not sure if it will be clearer to have non default object initialization in function whose name indicates default object initialization
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.
I also see a comment "TODO" to move the calling "initialize_default_objects()" to constructor. If we modify to propagate attr_count/attr_list to this function, we may not be able move this to constructor. Is it still o.k, if I do the modification as proposed?
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.
that move to constructor cant be moved to constructor since that is virtual function, it could be moved, but it would need to be called explicitly in each constructor, and not in SwitchStateBase
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.
o.k. I'll modify as proposed, then.
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.
thanks, this is actually interesting that some of the internal objects depends on the input attributes to create_switch function, and not actual hardware profile, this is wired to me
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.
Modified as proposed.