@@ -508,6 +508,18 @@ print_human_size(struct dpctl_params *dpctl_p, uint64_t value)
}
}
+/* qsort comparison function. */
+static int
+compare_port_nos(const void *a_, const void *b_)
+{
+ const odp_port_t *ap = a_;
+ const odp_port_t *bp = b_;
+ uint32_t a = odp_to_u32(*ap);
+ uint32_t b = odp_to_u32(*bp);
+
+ return a < b ? -1 : a > b;
+}
+
static void
show_dpif(struct dpif *dpif, struct dpctl_params *dpctl_p)
{
@@ -531,7 +543,25 @@ show_dpif(struct dpif *dpif, struct dpctl_params *dpctl_p)
}
}
+ odp_port_t *port_nos = NULL;
+ size_t allocated_port_nos = 0, n_port_nos = 0;
DPIF_PORT_FOR_EACH (&dpif_port, &dump, dpif) {
+ if (n_port_nos >= allocated_port_nos) {
+ port_nos = x2nrealloc(port_nos, &allocated_port_nos,
+ sizeof *port_nos);
+ }
+
+ port_nos[n_port_nos] = dpif_port.port_no;
+ n_port_nos++;
+ }
+
+ qsort(port_nos, n_port_nos, sizeof *port_nos, compare_port_nos);
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < n_port_nos; i++) {
+ if (dpif_port_query_by_number(dpif, port_nos[i], &dpif_port)) {
+ continue;
+ }
+
dpctl_print(dpctl_p, "\tport %u: %s",
dpif_port.port_no, dpif_port.name);
@@ -580,6 +610,7 @@ show_dpif(struct dpif *dpif, struct dpctl_params *dpctl_p)
if (error) {
dpctl_print(dpctl_p, ", open failed (%s)",
ovs_strerror(error));
+ dpif_port_destroy(&dpif_port);
continue;
}
error = netdev_get_stats(netdev, &s);
@@ -612,7 +643,10 @@ show_dpif(struct dpif *dpif, struct dpctl_params *dpctl_p)
ovs_strerror(error));
}
}
+ dpif_port_destroy(&dpif_port);
}
+
+ free(port_nos);
}
typedef void (*dps_for_each_cb)(struct dpif *, struct dpctl_params *);
The port listing did not consistently print in the same order. While it is a better user experience to see the ports printed in order, more importantly, this fixes a unit test ("dpctl - add-if set-if del-if") that would occasionally fail due to expecting that the ports are printed in order. Signed-off-by: Justin Pettit <jpettit@ovn.org> --- lib/dpctl.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)