[7.2] vtysh: fix searching commands in parent nodes

[zays26]

Do not check parent command nodes in case of ambiguous and incomplete commands

Signed-off-by: Pavel Ivashchenko pivashchenko@nfware.com

[qlyoung]

Seems reasonable on the surface, but what bug in particular is this fixing? Marking DNM for now so I can get a better understanding

[NetDEF-CI]

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9088/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Warnings Generated during build:

Checkout code: Successful with additional warnings

Report for vtysh.c | 4 issues
===============================================
< ERROR: code indent should use tabs where possible
< #495: FILE: /tmp/f1-3907/vtysh.c:495:
< WARNING: please, no spaces at the start of a line
< #495: FILE: /tmp/f1-3907/vtysh.c:495:

---

CLANG Static Analyzer Summary

• Github Pull Request 5084, comparing to Git base SHA ba0d195

No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base

1 Static Analyzer issues remaining.

See details at
https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9088/artifact/shared/static_analysis/index.html

[zays26]

Seems reasonable on the surface, but what bug in particular is this fixing? Marking DNM for now so I can get a better understanding

I cannot find a serious bug for this fix. It's rather unexpected behavior, for example:

host# conf t
host(config)# router ospf
host(config-router)# r
% Command incomplete.
% [BGP] Unknown command: r
host#

I expect something like this:

host# conf t
host(config)# router ospf
host(config-router)# r
% Command incomplete: r
host(config-router)#

We can break configuration in case of command "r" will be matched in a parent node

[NetDEF-CI]

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9092/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

---

CLANG Static Analyzer Summary

• Github Pull Request 5084, comparing to Git base SHA ba0d195

No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base

1 Static Analyzer issues remaining.

See details at
https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9092/artifact/shared/static_analysis/index.html

[qlyoung]

@zays26 I'm okay with this patch, however you need to apply the same behavior everywhere else this code has been copy-pasted. Unfortunately this is one of the worst bits of code in the whole codebase. There's another copy of this code around line 790 that I am pretty sure needs to be changed as well, and maybe in command.c.

[zays26]

@qlyoung I have updated code in vtysh.c and command.c

[NetDEF-CI]

Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFUL

Congratulations, this patch passed basic tests

Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System

CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9167/

This is a comment from an automated CI system.
For questions and feedback in regards to this CI system, please feel free to email
Martin Winter - mwinter (at) opensourcerouting.org.

Warnings Generated during build:

Checkout code: Successful with additional warnings

Report for command.c | 2 issues
===============================================
< WARNING: line over 80 characters
< #1148: FILE: /tmp/f1-19164/command.c:1148:

---

CLANG Static Analyzer Summary

• Github Pull Request 5084, comparing to Git base SHA c93f27d

No Changes in Static Analysis warnings compared to base

1 Static Analyzer issues remaining.

See details at
https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-9167/artifact/shared/static_analysis/index.html

[zays26]

@qlyoung Hi! Can you check this patch too? It's the same patch like in the pull request #5083

[qlyoung]

@zays26 sorry, 7.2 is now a stable release branch. We're not taking any more patches for 7.2 if I'm not mistaken.

[zays26]

@zays26 sorry, 7.2 is now a stable release branch. We're not taking any more patches for 7.2 if I'm not mistaken.

@qlyoung Ok! No problem.