add HLD md document on add/remove ports dynamically feature#1
add HLD md document on add/remove ports dynamically feature#1tomer-israel wants to merge 2 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
tomer-israel
force-pushed
the
port-add-del-dynamically
branch
3 times, most recently
from
fce5c63 to
d3fc101
Compare
tomer-israel
force-pushed
the
port-add-del-dynamically
branch
from
d3fc101 to
c380c4a
Compare
| 3. Portsyncd is adding the new port info to App DB | ||
| 4. On portsorch (orchagent) - Port set event is received from App DB. | ||
| 5. Portsorch is creating the port on SAI. | ||
| 6. SDK is creating the port and the host interfaces. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can add complete steps [not necessary though]...I mean b/w SDK and Netlink.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i will add the complete steps
| - Del port: Receive del port operation from port config table, remove this port from APP DB. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Sflowmgr: | ||
| Add port: Event from config db - Update the speed to sflow internal db. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did not get this part , we need to remove speed or polling rate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
its a description of what sflowmgr is doing as a result of a change on config db ports table - it's not a change that we are planning to add.
I will try to change it in a way that it will be more clear.
| https://github.com/Azure/sonic-buildimage/pull/8422 <br /> | ||
| https://github.com/Azure/sonic-platform-daemons/pull/212 | ||
|
|
||
| #### snampagent: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Say is SNMP data is fetcched via a remote client for this port and later on port is deleted, what will be MIB entries....STALE or REMOVED
There was a problem hiding this comment.
after removing a port the MIB will remove also. the fetched snmp data should be without this port.
|
|
||
| We have also possible way for race condition: | ||
|
|
||
|  |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel, there will be multiple such problems, can we change portsorch code to not remove "it entry in map" for buffer till port is added. Even after that we may have problems, If del port is followed by add Port immediately. We may need to validate the config in that case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"..can we change portsorch code to not remove "it entry in map" for buffer till port is added.." - what is it mean?
" If del port is followed by add Port immediately. We may need to validate the config in that case." - why del port and add port immediately is problematic? can you explain why do you think we need to validate from config?
|
@tomer-israel this HLD is in your own fork. |
|
moving to external PR |
3 participants
No description provided.