-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 195
Xcvrd Refactor 4/13: Move CMIS logic in process_single_logical_port into its own function #716
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.
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
c8afa0b to
6ce0b7c
Compare
|
/azp run |
|
/azp run |
1 similar comment
|
/azp run |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
1 similar comment
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull request overview
This PR refactors the CmisManagerTask by extracting CMIS state machine processing logic from process_single_lport into a new dedicated function process_cmis_state_machine. This is part 4 of a larger refactoring effort to improve code organization and maintainability of the xcvrd daemon.
- Extracted state machine logic into
process_cmis_state_machinefor better code organization - Refactored
process_single_lportto validate inputs and prepare data before invoking the state machine - Preserved all existing functionality and error handling paths
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
|
@bobby-nexthop is there any change in the logic or only in code arranagement? |
Description
This change moves CMIS processing into a new function process_cmis_state_machine. This will be broken up further in future PRs
Motivation and Context
xcvrd has gotten to 4000 lines long. To make things easier, we'd like to refactor it. This is the second PR in a series that aims to do the following:
The new flow will go from calling

task_worker()toHow Has This Been Tested?
Additional Information (Optional)