On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:08:50AM +0200, Jan Klemkow wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The following diff simplifies a switch case statement with no functional
> change.
>
> In case of IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DATABASE duplicated code is removed. This part
> of the code is now the same as in ospfd.
This part looks fine.
>
> In case of IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DB_INTRA the code was also duplicated and due
> to a missing continue the v->type variable was double check.
This doesn't look correct. v->type was checked against
LSA_TYPE_INTRA_A_PREFIX which is not the same as
LSA_TYPE_INTER_A_PREFIX
I can't tell if a continue; is missing (which looks likely) in the
IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DB_INTRA case or if the check against both INTRA and INTER
is deliberate.
>
> OK?
>
> bye,
> Jan
>
> Index: rde_lsdb.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/ospf6d/rde_lsdb.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.43
> diff -u -p -r1.43 rde_lsdb.c
> --- rde_lsdb.c 17 Feb 2020 08:12:22 -0000 1.43
> +++ rde_lsdb.c 21 Aug 2020 07:52:15 -0000
> @@ -763,9 +763,7 @@ lsa_dump(struct lsa_tree *tree, int imsg
> lsa_age(v);
> switch (imsg_type) {
> case IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DATABASE:
> - rde_imsg_compose_ospfe(IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DATABASE, 0, pid,
> - &v->lsa->hdr, ntohs(v->lsa->hdr.len));
> - continue;
> + break;
> case IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DB_SELF:
> if (v->lsa->hdr.adv_rtr == rde_router_id())
> break;
> @@ -787,8 +785,6 @@ lsa_dump(struct lsa_tree *tree, int imsg
> break;
> continue;
> case IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DB_INTRA:
> - if (v->type == LSA_TYPE_INTRA_A_PREFIX)
> - break;
> case IMSG_CTL_SHOW_DB_SUM:
> if (v->type == LSA_TYPE_INTER_A_PREFIX)
> break;
>
