ospfd: Max multipath config support #8058
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
polychaeta
reviewed
Feb 11, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your contribution to FRR!
Click for style suggestions
To apply these suggestions:
curl -s https://gist.githubusercontent.com/polychaeta/8b58fd5c3c66499c54e67d118579c670/raw/39588e8f10ca96b4418afe8f9ec82f7cf6e3a0c8/cr_8058_1613038438.diff | git apply
diff --git a/ospfd/ospf_vty.c b/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
index 34213f2b4..6682a3724 100644
--- a/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
+++ b/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
@@ -2654,11 +2654,10 @@ static void ospf_maxpath_set(struct vty *vty, struct ospf *ospf, uint16_t paths)
}
/* Ospf Maximum multiple paths config support */
-DEFUN (ospf_max_multipath,
- ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
- "maximum-paths " CMD_RANGE_STR(1, MULTIPATH_NUM),
- "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n"
- "Number of paths\n")
+DEFUN(ospf_max_multipath, ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
+ "maximum-paths " CMD_RANGE_STR(1, MULTIPATH_NUM),
+ "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n"
+ "Number of paths\n")
{
VTY_DECLVAR_INSTANCE_CONTEXT(ospf, ospf);
int idx_number = 1;
@@ -2670,11 +2669,8 @@ DEFUN (ospf_max_multipath,
return CMD_SUCCESS;
}
-DEFUN (no_ospf_max_multipath,
- no_ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
- "no maximum-paths",
- NO_STR
- "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n")
+DEFUN(no_ospf_max_multipath, no_ospf_max_multipath_cmd, "no maximum-paths",
+ NO_STR "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n")
{
VTY_DECLVAR_INSTANCE_CONTEXT(ospf, ospf);
uint16_t maxpaths = MULTIPATH_NUM;
If you are a new contributor to FRR, please see our contributing guidelines.
After making changes, you do not need to create a new PR. You should perform an amend or interactive rebase followed by a force push.
Outdated results 💚Basic BGPD CI results: SUCCESS, 0 tests failed
For details, please contact louberger |
Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULContinuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULCongratulations, this patch passed basic tests Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17063/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. Warnings Generated during build:Debian 10 amd64 build: Successful with additional warningsDebian Package lintian failed for Debian 10 amd64 build: |
riw777
approved these changes
Feb 23, 2021
|
LGTM |
Outdated results 💚Basic BGPD CI results: SUCCESS, 0 tests failed
For details, please contact louberger |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedTopotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16I386-17688/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17688/artifact/TOPO7U16I386/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Successful on other platforms/tests
|
|
it doesn't look like the ci errors are related to this fix, so I'll push a rerun to see what happens |
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedTopotests Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16AMD64-17919/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17919/artifact/TOPO7U16AMD64/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16I386-17919/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17919/artifact/TOPO7U16I386/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Successful on other platforms/tests
|
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedTopotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16I386-17966/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17966/artifact/TOPO7U16I386/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U18AMD64-17966/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 amd64 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-17966/artifact/TOPO7U18AMD64/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Successful on other platforms/tests
|
|
CI failures in isis tests , looks not relevant to this change . |
|
ci:rerun |
|
I think you need to rebase to newer master - there have been some topotest fixes |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedTopotests Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16AMD64-18061/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 amd64 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-18061/artifact/TOPO7U16AMD64/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: Failed (click for details)Topology Test Results are at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-TOPO7U16I386-18061/test Topology Tests failed for Topotests Ubuntu 16.04 i386 part 7: see full log at https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-18061/artifact/TOPO7U16I386/ErrorLog/log_topotests.txt Successful on other platforms/tests
|
Description: OSPF does not have an option to control the maximum multiple equal cost paths to reach a destination/route(ECMP). Currently, it is using the system specific max multiple paths. But Somtimes, It requires to control the multiple paths from ospf. This cli helps to configure the max number multiple paths in ospf. Signed-off-by: Rajesh Girada <rgirada@vmware.com>
polychaeta
reviewed
Mar 30, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your contribution to FRR!
Click for style suggestions
To apply these suggestions:
curl -s https://gist.githubusercontent.com/polychaeta/253479b3f7921c65682ae7524699c82c/raw/6cdf0a1250be3758a4e95c6b015b3a7fcbc5b776/cr_8058_1617080749.diff | git apply
diff --git a/ospfd/ospf_vty.c b/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
index f3583c26f..876403bb4 100644
--- a/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
+++ b/ospfd/ospf_vty.c
@@ -2712,11 +2712,10 @@ static void ospf_maxpath_set(struct vty *vty, struct ospf *ospf, uint16_t paths)
}
/* Ospf Maximum multiple paths config support */
-DEFUN (ospf_max_multipath,
- ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
- "maximum-paths " CMD_RANGE_STR(1, MULTIPATH_NUM),
- "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n"
- "Number of paths\n")
+DEFUN(ospf_max_multipath, ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
+ "maximum-paths " CMD_RANGE_STR(1, MULTIPATH_NUM),
+ "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n"
+ "Number of paths\n")
{
VTY_DECLVAR_INSTANCE_CONTEXT(ospf, ospf);
int idx_number = 1;
@@ -2728,11 +2727,8 @@ DEFUN (ospf_max_multipath,
return CMD_SUCCESS;
}
-DEFUN (no_ospf_max_multipath,
- no_ospf_max_multipath_cmd,
- "no maximum-paths",
- NO_STR
- "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n")
+DEFUN(no_ospf_max_multipath, no_ospf_max_multipath_cmd, "no maximum-paths",
+ NO_STR "Max no of multiple paths for ECMP support\n")
{
VTY_DECLVAR_INSTANCE_CONTEXT(ospf, ospf);
uint16_t maxpaths = MULTIPATH_NUM;
If you are a new contributor to FRR, please see our contributing guidelines.
After making changes, you do not need to create a new PR. You should perform an amend or interactive rebase followed by a force push.
Yes Mark, Rebased it. |
💚 Basic BGPD CI results: SUCCESS, 0 tests failedResults table
For details, please contact louberger |
Continuous Integration Result: FAILEDContinuous Integration Result: FAILEDSee below for issues. This is a comment from an automated CI system. Get source / Pull Request: SuccessfulBuilding Stage: SuccessfulBasic Tests: FailedTopotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4: Failed (click for details)Topotests Ubuntu 18.04 arm8 part 4: No useful log foundSuccessful on other platforms/tests
|
|
ci:rerun |
Continuous Integration Result: SUCCESSFULCongratulations, this patch passed basic tests Tested-by: NetDEF / OpenSourceRouting.org CI System CI System Testrun URL: https://ci1.netdef.org/browse/FRR-FRRPULLREQ-18083/ This is a comment from an automated CI system. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description:
OSPF does not have an option to control the maximum multiple
equal cost paths to reach a destination/route(ECMP).
Currently, it is using the system specific max multiple paths.
But Somtimes, It requires to control the multiple paths from ospf.
This cli helps to configure the max number multiple paths in ospf.
Signed-off-by: Rajesh Girada rgirada@vmware.com