Multi-asic support for ApplyPatchDb API

[agadia-cisco]

• gNMI uses Dbus ApplyPatchDb API. Currently it doesn't use namespace & it has to be updated.

• mixed_db_client.go calls ApplyPatchDb here, ApplyPatchDb definition here

• How this was discovered?

  • when creating config checkpoint by using Dbus API; then configuration returned is the namespace config-db. dbus-send --system --dest=org.SONiC.HostService.gcu --type=method_call --print-reply /org/SONiC/HostService/gcu org.SONiC.HostService.gcu.create_checkpoint string:'checkpoint1'

  • but when run ApplyPatchDb API, then it isn't considering the PORTS viz in the namespace config-db & if given the port name which exists in config_db (not the namespace one), then also ApplyPatchDb API fails.

    • dbus-send --system --dest=org.SONiC.HostService.gcu --type=method_call --print-reply /org/SONiC/HostService/gcu org.SONiC.HostService.gcu.apply_patch_db string:'[{"op": "add", "path": "/PORT/Ethernet0/admin_status", "value": "down"}]' => fails with error "'PORT' not found in ....(returns entire config_db.json)"

    • dbus-send --system --dest=org.SONiC.HostService.gcu --type=method_call --print-reply /org/SONiC/HostService/gcu org.SONiC.HostService.gcu.apply_patch_db string:'[{"op": "add", "path": "/localhost/PORT/Eth0~10~10~10/admin_status", "value": "down"}]' => "Error: Failed to apply patch on the following scopes:"

[levhuan]

Per this change GCU apply-patch to support multi-asic, the namespace/asic ID is the prefix in the path in JSON file. Will need to change MixedDbClient.ConvertToJsonPatch() to include the asic namespace in the path.

Is this a known issue? If not, Cisco can work on a PR for this.

[rlhui]

Per this change GCU apply-patch to support multi-asic, the namespace/asic ID is the prefix in the path in JSON file. Will need to change MixedDbClient.ConvertToJsonPatch() to include the asic namespace in the path.

Is this a known issue? If not, Cisco can work on a PR for this.

@ganglyu please help answer? thanks.

[ganglyu]

We haven't verified this feature with a multi-ASIC device. Your assistance in resolving this issue would be greatly appreciated.