Skip to content
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

[aclorch]: only bind to port for ACL_TABLE_PFCWD type #561

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 3, 2018

Conversation

sihuihan88
Copy link
Contributor

Signed-off-by: Sihui Han sihan@microsoft.com

What I did
Only bind to port for ACL_TABLE_PFCWD type
Why I did it
PFCWD only requires to bind to port regardless if port is a LAG member. And LAG binding is not supported for egress acl table which will be used for PFCWD.
How I verified it

Details if related

Signed-off-by: Sihui Han <sihan@microsoft.com>
@@ -1022,7 +1022,7 @@ bool AclTable::create()

sai_attribute_t attr;
vector<sai_attribute_t> table_attrs;
vector<int32_t> bpoint_list = { SAI_ACL_BIND_POINT_TYPE_PORT, SAI_ACL_BIND_POINT_TYPE_LAG };
vector<int32_t> bpoint_list = type == ACL_TABLE_PFCWD ? { SAI_ACL_BIND_POINT_TYPE_PORT} : { SAI_ACL_BIND_POINT_TYPE_PORT, SAI_ACL_BIND_POINT_TYPE_LAG };
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If LAG binding is not supported on egress, will it be better to check the stage and select the binding point?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

offline discussed with guohan, currently only brcm pfcwd use egress acl and only brcm might have egress lag bind issue. Other platforms might still be available to use egress LAG binding. So it's better to restrict port binding for PFCWD which is also by design for this use case.

Signed-off-by: Sihui Han <sihan@microsoft.com>
@sihuihan88 sihuihan88 force-pushed the dev/sihan/bind branch 2 times, most recently from b3ad47f to 401d619 Compare August 3, 2018 00:41
@lguohan
Copy link
Contributor

lguohan commented Aug 3, 2018

retest this please

@lguohan lguohan merged commit 6556b26 into sonic-net:master Aug 3, 2018
qiluo-msft added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2018
EdenGri pushed a commit to EdenGri/sonic-swss that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2022
…mand, etc., (sonic-net#561)

* Modified CLI doc for 201904 release, changed the config interface commands to reflect interfacename sequence change, explained the diff w.r.t FRR/Quagga

* Addressed review comments; corrected few syntax issues; explicitly showed the differences in the commands between 201904 version and older versions
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants