-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 539
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
[orchagent] Add separate next hop table and orch #1702
Conversation
Hi @adamyeung - could you please add BRCM team to review this PR, thanks. |
df41c2c
to
23da0d2
Compare
Your change should not depend on "Juniper's MPLS enhancement". Could you only separate your changes into a standalone PR? |
@qiluo-msft We discussed this with Anshu and agreed this as a good approach to begin the review process. The code we intend to merge includes MPLS throughout, and so will only ever go in once Juniper's MPLS code is in. Once their PR has been merged we will rework this to just include the top commit. |
orchagent/nexthopkey.h
Outdated
|
||
NextHopKey ipKey() const | ||
{ | ||
return NextHopKey(ip_address, alias); |
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.
In case of EVPN/Vxlan, for the same ip & alias there can be multiple nexhtops with different vni and mac_address. If ipKey is used to compare the nexthop objects then the results might not be valid for EVPN/Vxlan.
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.
This method is specifically to get the underlying IP/interface pair to check if neighorch has learned this neighbor and has programmed the basic next hop for the pair. We don't want to create e.g. a labelled next hop for the pair if the basic next hop doesn't exist yet. I'll add a comment explaining the purpose of this function in my next update.
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.
Done
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.
I don't think this has to be added as part of the common class for a specific use-case. Please revert and use as pointed by Ann's comment below.
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.
I don't see this addressed
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.
@prsunny We are using this in several places and I think it would be good to keep here, but maybe a different name would make its purpose clearer? getNeighNhKey()? getArpNhKey()?
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.
@prsunny Or it could be pushed to NeighOrch... NeighOrch::isNeighborResolved(nexthop)?
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.
Fixed - I've taken Ann's second solution of adding a NeighOrch method
This is a critical change and its hard to review if mpls changes are present. Agree with @qiluo-msft that the code should be separated for better review. |
If we were to separate the code, then only some of what we are planning to merge would get reviewed - we need this to go in with the MPLS changes included. This commit (23da0d2) shows our proposed changes and nothing else so is the best place to review this. I can attempt to create the subset of that that doesn't depend on Juniper's code if absolutely necessary, but that subset would never actually be intended to be merged on its own. |
@smaheshm - FYI |
b433ea3
to
ed1f164
Compare
@LaveenBrcm @prsunny @qiluo-msft @smaheshm I've rebased our changes on top of Juniper's latest commit. ed1f164 is now the commit to review for this enhancement. |
MPLS changes are reviewed separately in another PR. Recommend splitting the PR to only have next hop table related changes. Else please rebase after mpls changes are merged and then mark this PR "ready for review". |
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.
As comments.
ed1f164
to
2da3ab3
Compare
Hi all, @prsunny @qiluo-msft @smaheshm @LaveenBrcm our code for this PR is now on top of the latest master, as a single commit with no dependencies on Juniper's changes. |
This pull request introduces 14 alerts and fixes 1 when merging 2da3ab3 into 0217b66 - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
fixed alerts:
|
2da3ab3
to
1ef160e
Compare
This pull request introduces 1 alert and fixes 1 when merging 1ef160e into d8ca31c - view on LGTM.com new alerts:
fixed alerts:
|
1ef160e
to
71d7692
Compare
This pull request fixes 1 alert when merging 71d7692 into d8ca31c - view on LGTM.com fixed alerts:
|
71d7692
to
fb54b25
Compare
This pull request fixes 1 alert when merging fb54b25 into d8ca31c - view on LGTM.com fixed alerts:
|
This reverts commit 0aac13f.
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
/AzurePipelines run |
Comment was made before the most recent commit for PR 1702 in repo Azure/sonic-swss |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
This pull request fixes 1 alert when merging 54234b4 into 94d2d44 - view on LGTM.com fixed alerts:
|
/azpw run |
/AzurePipelines run |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
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.
orchagent/mplsrouteorch.cpp
Outdated
} | ||
if (nextHops.getSize() == 1) | ||
/* Check that the next hop group is not owned by NhgOrch. */ | ||
if (ctx.nhg_index.empty()) |
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.
I think you must address this similar to routeorch. No need to move the whole code under this if
.
orchagent/routeorch.h
Outdated
@@ -137,7 +168,7 @@ struct LabelRouteBulkContext | |||
class RouteOrch : public Orch, public Subject | |||
{ | |||
public: | |||
RouteOrch(DBConnector *db, vector<table_name_with_pri_t> &tableNames, SwitchOrch *switchOrch, NeighOrch *neighOrch, IntfsOrch *intfsOrch, VRFOrch *vrfOrch, FgNhgOrch *fgNhgOrch); | |||
RouteOrch(DBConnector *db, vector<table_name_with_pri_t> &tableNames, SwitchOrch *switchOrc, NeighOrch *neighOrch, IntfsOrch *intfsOrch, VRFOrch *vrfOrch, FgNhgOrch *fgNhgOrch); |
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.
pls fix typo
This pull request fixes 1 alert when merging 792a4bd into ef6b5d4 - view on LGTM.com fixed alerts:
|
orchagent/mplsrouteorch.cpp
Outdated
@@ -638,7 +708,7 @@ bool RouteOrch::addLabelRoutePost(const LabelRouteBulkContext& ctx, const NextHo | |||
} | |||
} | |||
/* The route is pointing to a next hop group */ | |||
else | |||
else if (nextHops.getSize() > 1) |
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.
why > ?. Please keep it as 'else'
orchagent/mplsrouteorch.cpp
Outdated
gNhgOrch->incNhgRefCount(ctx.nhg_index); | ||
} | ||
|
||
SWSS_LOG_INFO("Create label route %u with next hop(s) %s", |
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.
Fix the alignment as before
orchagent/mplsrouteorch.cpp
Outdated
@@ -731,10 +825,10 @@ bool RouteOrch::addLabelRoutePost(const LabelRouteBulkContext& ctx, const NextHo | |||
} | |||
|
|||
SWSS_LOG_INFO("Post set label %u with next hop(s) %s", | |||
label, nextHops.to_string().c_str()); | |||
label, nextHops.to_string().c_str()); |
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.
Fix alignment
This pull request fixes 1 alert when merging a0c982e into fd0cafe - view on LGTM.com fixed alerts:
|
What I did
Added a new next hop group table to APP_DB, and orchagent support
to use this as an alternative to including next hop information in
the route table
Why I did it
Improves performance and occupancy usage when using the new table
How I verified it
Extended SWSS unit tests to cover new code, and ran existing tests
Additional details
The first 2 commits in this PR are part of Juniper's MPLS enhancement, which should be merged to master first. The commit to review for this PR is just the latest commit.