Fixes an issue of check logic in delete_depth_small function.
For a tbl24 entry, the 'ext_entry' field indicates whether we need
to use tbl8_gindex to read the next_hop from a tbl8 entry, or whether
it can be read directly from this entry.
If a route is deleted, the prefix of previous route is used to override
the deleted route.
When checking the depth of the previous route the conditional checks
both the ext_entry and the depth, but the "else" leg fails to take
account that the condition could fail for one of two possible reasons,
leading to an incorrect flow when 'ext_entry == 0' is true,
but 'lpm->tbl24[i].depth > depth' is false.
The fix here is to add a condition check to the else leg so that it
only executes when ext_entry is set.
Signed-off-by: Na Na <nana.nn@alibaba-inc.com>
Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 0 &&
lpm->tbl24[i].depth <= depth ) {
lpm->tbl24[i].valid = INVALID;
- }
- else {
+ } else if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 1) {
/*
* If TBL24 entry is extended, then there has
* to be a rule with depth >= 25 in the
if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 0 &&
lpm->tbl24[i].depth <= depth ) {
lpm->tbl24[i] = new_tbl24_entry;
- }
- else {
+ } else if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 1) {
/*
* If TBL24 entry is extended, then there has
* to be a rule with depth >= 25 in the