-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 70
nexus-db-queries: replace BgpPeerConfig with BgpPeerFromDb
#10086
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
Open
jgallagher
wants to merge
2
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
john/bgp-db-cleanup-1
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+160
−158
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
It looks like the test failing in CI is because these two disagree on the value of
interface_name:I don't think I changed the behavior here - it looks like the test as written before omitted checking this field. Was that intentional, and there's a reason they're different? Or is the fact that they're different a bug that's just now surfacing?
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 this mismatch is also present on main.
SwitchPortBgpPeerConfigtakes an explicitinterface_name: Nameargument:omicron/nexus/db-model/src/switch_port.rs
Lines 780 to 786 in afe86cb
and it ignores
p.interface_name(the interface name inside thenetworking_types::BgpPeerit's given). When we call this fromdo_switch_port_settings_create(), we pass thelink_name, not theinterface_name:omicron/nexus/db-queries/src/db/datastore/switch_port.rs
Lines 1503 to 1508 in afe86cb
That explains why when we query this BGP config back after inserting it, we see an interface name of
phy0(the link name), notqsfp0(the interface name inside theBgpPeerstruct, which is ignored AFAICT).I don't know what to make of this, though. Bug? Not bug just surprising behavior? More complex than either of those?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Filed #10104 for this, and pushed a workaround to this test (since this PR doesn't introduce this bug and is just a general cleanup/refactoring) in 9cfd9ff.