route: add missing priority to route_keygen() debug print #388
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
Route priority is part of the hash key calculation, but the debug print omitted it. This could cause seemingly identical values have different hash values. Fix this by also printing the route priority, and reformat according to clang-format. Before: DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x55fd326f7d50 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x18c DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x55fd326f7fa0 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x278 After: DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x558cfde91d50 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 prio 256 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x18c DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x558cfde91fa0 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 prio 1024 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x278 Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <[email protected]>
|
This confused me quite a while why these two routes got different hashes while all values were identical, until I noticed that the prio was part of the hash, but not printed. |
thom311
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 17, 2024
Route priority is part of the hash key calculation, but the debug print omitted it. This could cause seemingly identical values have different hash values. Fix this by also printing the route priority, and reformat according to clang-format. Before: DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x55fd326f7d50 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x18c DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x55fd326f7fa0 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x278 After: DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x558cfde91d50 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 prio 256 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x18c DBG<5>lib/route/route_obj.c:378 route_keygen: route 0x558cfde91fa0 key (fam 10 tos 0 table 254 prio 1024 addr fe80::/64) keysz 26 hash 0x278 Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <[email protected]> #388
|
merged as dcb9e2e. Thank you!! |
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.
Route priority is part of the hash key calculation, but the debug print omitted it. This could cause seemingly identical values have different hash values.
Fix this by also printing the route priority, and reformat according to .clang-format.
Before:
After:
I took the liberty of unbreaking the string, since breaking it can make it harder to grep for and the .clang-format says to not break strings. Even though this one is largely ungreppable with every second word being a format specifier.