Skip to content

NHG with Unequal Cost Members #2302

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
JaiOCP wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
+25 −0
Open

NHG with Unequal Cost Members #2302

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
95c4771
NHG with Unequal Cost Members
JaiOCP Jun 22, 2026
6075ead
NHG with Weighted or unWeighted Members
JaiOCP Jun 25, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
13 changes: 13 additions & 0 deletions inc/sainexthopgroup.h
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -359,6 +359,19 @@ typedef enum _sai_next_hop_group_attr_t
*/
SAI_NEXT_HOP_GROUP_ATTR_ADMIN_ROLE,

/**
* @brief This attribute indicates the nexthop group members weights
*
* NOS must query this attribute for the support.
* False: All members are with equal cost
* True: Members are configured with unequal cost
*
* @type bool
* @flags CREATE_ONLY
* @default false
*/
SAI_NEXT_HOP_GROUP_ATTR_MEMBERS_WITH_UNEQUAL_WEIGHTS,

@sathk-marvell sathk-marvell Jun 23, 2026

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.

@JaiOCP, what is the additional benefit of querying this capability?

If NOS is configured to program unequal paths, NOS can directly add those members to the NHG with the required weights, right? I believe we don't need any additional hardware capability/support to handle unequal-cost paths in this case.

Please let me know if I am missing any specific use case where this capability is required.

@JaiOCP JaiOCP Jun 23, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For the legacy implementation, yes.
For newer implementation where there is a dedicated resource for weight NHG vs unweighted NHG, we need to differentiate the NHG during NHG create.
Now you can make an argument that why not a new NHG type instead of a bool. Problem with that approach is that NHG may be of any type with members as wieghted or unweighted. Hence the introduction of a new bool attribute.


Comment thread
JaiOCP marked this conversation as resolved.
/**
* @brief End of attributes
*/
Expand Down
Loading