-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Enable retrieving existing Prefix CIDRs from the Ipamer #69
Conversation
Can you please add a small test, otherwise this looks fine. |
Added a test for all data sources |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please adjust godoc
ipam.go
Outdated
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ type Ipamer interface { | |||
// PrefixesOverlapping will check if one ore more prefix of newPrefixes is overlapping | |||
// with one of existingPrefixes | |||
PrefixesOverlapping(existingPrefixes []string, newPrefixes []string) error | |||
// Retrieve all existing Prefix CIDRs from the underlying storage |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
go doc should start with:
// ReadAllPrefixCidrs
prefix.go
Outdated
@@ -484,6 +484,11 @@ func (i *ipamer) newPrefix(cidr, parentCidr string) (*Prefix, error) { | |||
return p, nil | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// Retrieve all existing Prefix CIDRs from the underlying storage |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
same here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
still missing here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry about that, forgot it was in two places. Should be all good now
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #69 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 78.12% 78.19% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 7 7
Lines 640 642 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 500 502 +2
Misses 75 75
Partials 65 65
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Fixed. |
Discussion can be found here: #68