Skip to content

Conversation

@cprabha
Copy link
Contributor

@cprabha cprabha commented Jan 27, 2026

Hi ,

I have updated vendor specific route count supported on new platform.

Thanks,
Prabha

@cprabha cprabha requested a review from a team as a code owner January 27, 2026 23:27
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @cprabha, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refines a FIB exhaustion test by introducing a mechanism to dynamically set the BGP route count based on the device under test's hardware model. This change ensures that the test accurately reflects the supported route capacities of specific platforms, allowing for more precise and relevant testing of FIB resource limits.

Highlights

  • Go slices package import: The slices package from the Go standard library has been imported, indicating the use of its utility functions for slice manipulation.
  • Dynamic Route Count Adjustment: The test now includes logic to dynamically adjust the BGP route count based on the DUT's hardware model. Specifically, for the PTX10002-36QDD model, the Juniper vendor's route count is updated to 3,750,000.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

@OpenConfigBot
Copy link

OpenConfigBot commented Jan 27, 2026

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request updates the BGP route count for specific hardware models by introducing new maps to hold model-specific values. The approach is sound, but I have a couple of suggestions for improvement. First, I've recommended renaming the new variables for better clarity. Second, and more importantly, the current implementation modifies a global variable within a test function. This can lead to test flakiness and is generally considered an anti-pattern. I've provided a detailed comment explaining the issue and suggesting a refactor to use a local variable instead, which will make the test more robust and maintainable.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jan 27, 2026

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 21420606395

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 9.926%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 21419487776: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 2247
Relevant Lines: 22638

💛 - Coveralls

@cprabha cprabha marked this pull request as draft January 28, 2026 01:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants