On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Andy Gospodarek
<go...@cumulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Andy Gospodaerk <go...@cumulusnetworks.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dinesh Dutt <dd...@cumulusnetworks.com>
>
> ---
> ip/iproute.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/ip/iproute.c b/ip/iproute.c
> index 3795baf..3369c49 100644
> --- a/ip/iproute.c
> +++ b/ip/iproute.c
> @@ -451,6 +451,8 @@ int print_route(const struct sockaddr_nl *who, struct
> nlmsghdr *n, void *arg)
> fprintf(fp, "offload ");
> if (r->rtm_flags & RTM_F_NOTIFY)
> fprintf(fp, "notify ");
> + if (r->rtm_flags & RTNH_F_LINKDOWN)
> + fprintf(fp, "linkdown ");
This seems confusing for ECMP case where only some nexthop devs are
RTNH_F_LINKDOWN? Why mark entire route "linkdown" when it still has
viable nexthop devs for ECMP?
> if (tb[RTA_MARK]) {
> unsigned int mark = *(unsigned int*)RTA_DATA(tb[RTA_MARK]);
> if (mark) {
> @@ -670,6 +672,8 @@ int print_route(const struct sockaddr_nl *who, struct
> nlmsghdr *n, void *arg)
> fprintf(fp, " onlink");
> if (nh->rtnh_flags & RTNH_F_PERVASIVE)
> fprintf(fp, " pervasive");
> + if (nh->rtnh_flags & RTNH_F_LINKDOWN)
> + fprintf(fp, " linkdown");
> len -= NLMSG_ALIGN(nh->rtnh_len);
> nh = RTNH_NEXT(nh);
> }
> --
> 1.9.3
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
