Skip to content

CHECKING RDKBNETWOR-99 CHANGES - #222

Open
PalakshaOS wants to merge 1 commit into
rdkcentral:mainfrom
PalakshaOS:eth_checking
Open

CHECKING RDKBNETWOR-99 CHANGES#222
PalakshaOS wants to merge 1 commit into
rdkcentral:mainfrom
PalakshaOS:eth_checking

Conversation

@PalakshaOS

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Palaksha Gowda <palaksha.gowda@sky.uk>
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 28, 2026 16:32
@PalakshaOS
PalakshaOS requested a review from a team as a code owner July 28, 2026 16:32
@rdkcmf-jenkins

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

b'## Blackduck scan failure details

Summary: 0 violations, 0 files pending approval, 1 file pending identification.

  • Protex Server Path: /home/blackduck/github/wan-manager/222/rdkcentral/RdkWanManager

  • Commit: d23fe69

Report detail: gist'

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Adds a new DSCPMark field to the WAN Interface Marking data model and attempts to initialize it from PSM, exposing it as a writable TR-181 parameter.

Changes:

  • Extends DML_MARKING and TR-181 XML to include a new DSCPMark parameter.
  • Adds DSCPMark get/set handling in the Marking DML string parameter APIs.
  • Adds init-time logic to read DSCPMark from PSM for each Marking token.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 5 out of 5 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
source/TR-181/middle_layer_src/wanmgr_rdkbus_apis.c Reads DSCPMark from PSM during Marking init and skips/removes entries when missing.
source/TR-181/middle_layer_src/wanmgr_dml_iface_apis.c Exposes DSCPMark via TR-181 get/set and clears it on failed add.
source/TR-181/include/wanmgr_dml.h Adds DSCPMark storage to DML_MARKING.
source/TR-181/include/dmsb_tr181_psm_definitions.h Adds PSM key definition for DSCPMark.
config/RdkWanManager.xml Adds DSCPMark parameter to the Marking object.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

source/TR-181/middle_layer_src/wanmgr_dml_iface_apis.c:3015

  • DSCPMark is now writable via TR-181, but the commit path calls DmlAddMarking/DmlSetMarking, whose underlying PSM operations currently do not persist DSCPMark at all. This means DSCPMark changes will be lost and subsequent init may remove the Marking row when DSCPMark isn't found in PSM.
    if (strcmp(ParamName, "DSCPMark") == 0)
    {
        AnscCopyString(p_Marking->DSCPMark, pString);
        ret = TRUE;
    }

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

#define PSM_MARKING_SKBPORT "dmsb.wanmanager.if.%d.Marking.%s.SKBPort"
#define PSM_MARKING_SKBMARK "dmsb.wanmanager.if.%d.Marking.%s.SKBMark"
#define PSM_MARKING_ETH_PRIORITY_MASK "dmsb.wanmanager.if.%d.Marking.%s.EthernetPriorityMark"
#define PSM_MARKING_DSCPMARK "dmsb.wanmanager.if.%d.Marking.%d.DSCPMark"
Comment on lines +1039 to +1055
//Get DSCPMark from PSM
memset( acPSMQuery, 0, sizeof( acPSMQuery ) );
memset( acPSMValue, 0, sizeof( acPSMValue ) );

snprintf( acPSMQuery, sizeof( acPSMQuery ), PSM_MARKING_DSCPMARK, ulIfInstanceNumber, acTmpMarkingData );
if ( ( CCSP_SUCCESS == DmlWanGetPSMRecordValue( acPSMQuery, acPSMValue ) ) && \
( strlen( acPSMValue ) > 0 ) )
{
snprintf( p_Marking->DSCPMark, sizeof( p_Marking->DSCPMark ), "%s", acPSMValue );
}
else
{
WanMgr_RemoveMarkingEntryFromPSMList(acOldMarkingList, acTmpMarkingData, ulIfInstanceNumber);
CcspTraceInfo(("%s %d - PSM entry for DSCPMark Failed. Don't add Marking table Entry for token: (%s)\n", __FUNCTION__, __LINE__, token));
token = strtok( NULL, "-" );
continue;
}
Comment on lines +3011 to +3015
if (strcmp(ParamName, "DSCPMark") == 0)
{
AnscCopyString(p_Marking->DSCPMark, pString);
ret = TRUE;
}
@rdkcmf-jenkins

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

b'## WARNING: A Blackduck scan failure has been waived

A prior failure has been upvoted

  • Upvote reason: ok

  • Commit: d23fe69
    '

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants