Fabian Bläse <[email protected]> writes: > The Babel seqno wraps around when reaching its maximum value > (UINT16_MAX). When comparing seqnos, this has to be taken into account. > Therefore, plain number comparisons do not work. > > In a previous attempt to fix the wrapping behavior, one particular > comparison was missed. This causes the seqno of originated babel routes > to not wrap, but remain at UINT16_MAX indefinitely, resulting in slow > route propagation on topology changes. > > Make use of the previously introduced gt_mod64k macro to compare seqnos > correctly. > > Fixes: 3e7e4a71868bc519aacc0eb785471b46fc345a5c > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Bläse <[email protected]> > > --- > v2: fix syntax error > > proto/babel/babel.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/proto/babel/babel.c b/proto/babel/babel.c > index fe5c0599..209492f0 100644 > --- a/proto/babel/babel.c > +++ b/proto/babel/babel.c > @@ -1015,7 +1015,7 @@ babel_send_update_(struct babel_iface *ifa, btime > changed, struct fib *rtable) > > /* Our own seqno might have changed, in which case we update the routes > we > originate. */ > - if ((e->router_id == p->router_id) && (e->seqno < p->update_seqno)) > + if ((e->router_id == p->router_id) && (gt_mod64k(p->update_seqno, > e->seqno)))
I'd drop the extra parentheses around gt_mod64k(), but otherwise LGTM! Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email protected]>
