On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 7:48 PM Mark Michelson <mmich...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Felix,
>
> CI for this patch looked pretty bad, and it's because of the removal of
> route_exchange_relevant_port() from route.h. This causes compilation
> errors. If this part of the patch is moved to patch 2, then
>
> Acked-by: Mark Michelson <mmich...@redhat.com>
>
> On 4/30/25 03:37, Felix Huettner via dev wrote:
> > Previously we created an advertise_datapath_entry for each local router
> > datapath, independently if any of its ports are bound to the current
> > chassis or take part in dynamic-routing at all.
> >
> > As ad->maintain_vrf was false and there was never a route added this did
> > not do anything other than wasting memory.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Felix Huettner <felix.huettner@stackit.cloud>
> > ---
> > controller/route.c | 25 +++++++++++++++----------
> > controller/route.h | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/controller/route.c b/controller/route.c
> > index 55d3e0ae3..ebb44ab53 100644
> > --- a/controller/route.c
> > +++ b/controller/route.c
> > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ VLOG_DEFINE_THIS_MODULE(exchange);
> > #define PRIORITY_DEFAULT 1000
> > #define PRIORITY_LOCAL_BOUND 100
> >
> > -bool
> > +static bool
> > route_exchange_relevant_port(const struct sbrec_port_binding *pb)
> > {
> > return pb && smap_get_bool(&pb->options, "dynamic-routing", false);
> > @@ -161,11 +161,7 @@ route_run(struct route_ctx_in *r_ctx_in,
> > if (!ld->n_peer_ports || ld->is_switch) {
> > continue;
> > }
> > -
> > - ad = xzalloc(sizeof(*ad));
> > - ad->db = ld->datapath;
> > - hmap_init(&ad->routes);
> > - smap_init(&ad->bound_ports);
> > + ad = NULL;
> >
> > /* This is a LR datapath, find LRPs with route exchange options
> > * that are bound locally. */
> > @@ -181,6 +177,13 @@ route_run(struct route_ctx_in *r_ctx_in,
> > continue;
> > }
> >
> > + if (!ad) {
> > + ad = xzalloc(sizeof(*ad));
> > + ad->db = ld->datapath;
> > + hmap_init(&ad->routes);
> > + smap_init(&ad->bound_ports);
> > + }
> > +
> > ad->maintain_vrf |=
> > smap_get_bool(&repb->options,
> > "dynamic-routing-maintain-vrf",
> > @@ -223,10 +226,12 @@ route_run(struct route_ctx_in *r_ctx_in,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - tracked_datapath_add(ld->datapath, TRACKED_RESOURCE_NEW,
> > - r_ctx_out->tracked_re_datapaths);
> > -
> > - hmap_insert(r_ctx_out->announce_routes, &ad->node,
> ad->db->tunnel_key);
> > + if (ad) {
> > + tracked_datapath_add(ld->datapath, TRACKED_RESOURCE_NEW,
> > + r_ctx_out->tracked_re_datapaths);
> > + hmap_insert(r_ctx_out->announce_routes, &ad->node,
> > + ad->db->tunnel_key);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > const struct sbrec_advertised_route *route;
> > diff --git a/controller/route.h b/controller/route.h
> > index aee7ad302..11016d818 100644
> > --- a/controller/route.h
> > +++ b/controller/route.h
> > @@ -83,7 +83,6 @@ const struct sbrec_port_binding
> *route_exchange_find_port(
> > const struct sbrec_chassis *chassis,
> > const struct sset *active_tunnels,
> > const struct sbrec_port_binding *pb);
> > -bool route_exchange_relevant_port(const struct sbrec_port_binding *);
> > uint32_t advertise_route_hash(const struct in6_addr *dst, unsigned int
> plen);
> > void route_run(struct route_ctx_in *, struct route_ctx_out *);
> > void route_cleanup(struct hmap *announce_routes);
>
>
Thanks Felix and Mark,
I took care of the comment and applied this to main and branch-25.03.
Regards,
Ales
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
