route: use the new helper function for comparing nexthops

When a route is created while the interface has no link, we get a
notification with the route and the nexthop having the flag LINKDOWN.

If the interface later gets a link, we do not get a route notification
about it, so the route and nexthop stay at LINKDOWN in the libnl cache.

If the route then gets removed again, the to be removed route will not
have the LINKDOWN flag anymore, which then can break comparison of the
nexthop(s).

So use the new nexthop identical helper to avoid this scenario.

Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@bisdn.de>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 12 deletions

diff --git a/lib/route/route_obj.c b/lib/route/route_obj.c
index aba1a1b..0a0c06d 100644
--- a/lib/route/route_obj.c
+++ b/lib/route/route_obj.c
@@ -449,7 +449,7 @@ static uint64_t route_compare(struct nl_object *_a, struct nl_object *_b,
 			found = 0;
 			nl_list_for_each_entry(nh_b, &b->rt_nexthops,
 					       rtnh_list) {
-				if (!rtnl_route_nh_compare(nh_a, nh_b, ~0, 0)) {
+				if (rtnl_route_nh_identical(nh_a, nh_b)) {
 					found = 1;
 					break;
 				}
@@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ static uint64_t route_compare(struct nl_object *_a, struct nl_object *_b,
 			found = 0;
 			nl_list_for_each_entry(nh_a, &a->rt_nexthops,
 					       rtnh_list) {
-				if (!rtnl_route_nh_compare(nh_a, nh_b, ~0, 0)) {
+				if (rtnl_route_nh_identical(nh_a, nh_b)) {
 					found = 1;
 					break;
 				}
@@ -538,7 +538,7 @@ static int route_update(struct nl_object *old_obj, struct nl_object *new_obj)
 		 * Do not add the nexthop to old route if it was already added before
 		 */
 		nl_list_for_each_entry(old_nh, &old_route->rt_nexthops, rtnh_list) {
-			if (!rtnl_route_nh_compare(old_nh, new_nh, ~0, 0)) {
+			if (rtnl_route_nh_identical(old_nh, new_nh)) {
 				return 0;
 			}
 		}
@@ -574,15 +574,7 @@ static int route_update(struct nl_object *old_obj, struct nl_object *new_obj)
 		 */
 		nl_list_for_each_entry(old_nh, &old_route->rt_nexthops,
 			rtnh_list) {
-			/*
-			 * Since the new route has only one nexthop, it's not
-			 * an ECMP route and the nexthop won't have a weight.
-			 * Similarily, the nexthop might have been marked as
-			 * DEAD in its flags if it was deleted.
-			 * Therefore ignore NH_ATTR_FLAGS (= 0x1) and
-			 * NH_ATTR_WEIGHT (= 0x2) while comparing nexthops.
-			 */
-			if (!rtnl_route_nh_compare(old_nh, new_nh, ~0x3, 0)) {
+			if (rtnl_route_nh_identical(old_nh, new_nh)) {
 
 				rtnl_route_remove_nexthop(old_route, old_nh);