Yes, I just refer to the support of protocol, not considering that id is
unique. It is too heavy to get all.
> 2021年3月31日 下午11:36，David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com> 写道：
>
> On 3/31/21 5:53 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>>> @@ -124,6 +125,9 @@ static int flush_nexthop(struct nlmsghdr *nlh, void
>>> *arg)
>>> if (tb[NHA_ID])
>>> id = rta_getattr_u32(tb[NHA_ID]);
>>>
>>> + if (filter.id && filter.id != id)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> if (id && !delete_nexthop(id))
>>> filter.flushed++;
>>>
>>> @@ -491,7 +495,10 @@ static int ipnh_list_flush(int argc, char **argv, int
>>> action)
>>> NEXT_ARG();
>>> if (get_unsigned(&id, *argv, 0))
>>> invarg("invalid id value", *argv);
>>> - return ipnh_get_id(id);
>>> + if (action == IPNH_FLUSH)
>>> + filter.id = id;
>>> + else
>>> + return ipnh_get_id(id);
>>
>> I think it's quite weird to ask for a dump of all nexthops only to
>> delete a specific one. How about this:
>
> +1
>
>>
>> ```
>> diff --git a/ip/ipnexthop.c b/ip/ipnexthop.c
>> index 0263307c49df..09a3076231aa 100644
>> --- a/ip/ipnexthop.c
>> +++ b/ip/ipnexthop.c
>> @@ -765,8 +765,16 @@ static int ipnh_list_flush(int argc, char **argv, int
>> action)
>> if (!filter.master)
>> invarg("VRF does not exist\n", *argv);
>> } else if (!strcmp(*argv, "id")) {
>> - NEXT_ARG();
>> - return ipnh_get_id(ipnh_parse_id(*argv));
>> + /* When 'id' is specified with 'flush' / 'list' we do
>> + * not need to perform a dump.
>> + */
>> + if (action == IPNH_LIST) {
>> + NEXT_ARG();
>> + return ipnh_get_id(ipnh_parse_id(*argv));
>> + } else {
>> + return ipnh_modify(RTM_DELNEXTHOP, 0, argc,
>> + argv);
>> + }
>
> since delete just needs the id, you could refactor ipnh_modify and
> create a ipnh_delete_id.
