On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Roopa Prabhu <ro...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Hangbin Liu <liuhang...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2017-07-20 23:06 GMT+08:00 Hangbin Liu <liuhang...@gmail.com>:
>>>>> +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
>>>>> @@ -3637,12 +3637,6 @@ static int inet6_rtm_getroute(struct sk_buff
>>>>> *in_skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
>>>>> dst = ip6_route_lookup(net, &fl6, 0);
>>>>>
>>>>> rt = container_of(dst, struct rt6_info, dst);
>>>>> - if (rt->dst.error) {
>>>>> - err = rt->dst.error;
>>>>> - ip6_rt_put(rt);
>>>>> - goto errout;
>>>>> - }
>>>>
>>>> hmm... or instead of remove this check, should we check all the entry? Like
>>>> if ((rt->dst.error && rt != net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry && rt !=
>>> ^^ mistake here
>>>> net->ipv6.ip6_blk_hole_entry) ||
>>>> rt == net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry )
>>>
>>> Sorry, there should be no need to check ip6_null_entry since the
>>> error is already
>>> -ENETUNREACH. So how about
>>
>> Hmm? All of these 3 entries have error set, right??
>> So we should only check dst.error...
>
> removing the check seems ok to me. We can also make the check
> conditional to fibmatch code only
> to eliminate any change in behavior introduced by fibmatch.
>
> ie if (fibmatch && rt->dst.error).
>
> Hangbin, can you also pls check that fibmatch works ok for such routes
> with your patch applied ?.
>
> ip netns exec client ip -6 route get fibmatch 2003::1 (with latest
> iproute2)
>
> thank you.
I tried this with your patch and this works for the fibmatch case as well.
