|
@@ -1728,6 +1728,7 @@ _compare_routerinfo_by_ip_and_bw(const void **a, const void **b)
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
routerinfo_t *first = *(routerinfo_t **)a, *second = *(routerinfo_t **)b;
|
|
|
int first_is_auth, second_is_auth;
|
|
|
+ uint32_t bw_first, bw_second;
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* we return -1 if first should appear before second... that is,
|
|
|
* if first is a better router. */
|
|
@@ -1736,6 +1737,8 @@ _compare_routerinfo_by_ip_and_bw(const void **a, const void **b)
|
|
|
else if (first->addr > second->addr)
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
+ /* XXX020 k n lg n memcmps could show up bigtime in profiling. If
|
|
|
+ * they do, I suggest we just give authorities a free pass. -RD */
|
|
|
first_is_auth =
|
|
|
router_digest_is_trusted_dir(first->cache_info.identity_digest);
|
|
|
second_is_auth =
|
|
@@ -1751,12 +1754,17 @@ _compare_routerinfo_by_ip_and_bw(const void **a, const void **b)
|
|
|
else if (!first->is_running && second->is_running)
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
- else if (first->bandwidthrate > second->bandwidthrate)
|
|
|
- return -1;
|
|
|
- else if (first->bandwidthrate < second->bandwidthrate)
|
|
|
+ bw_first = router_get_advertised_bandwidth(first);
|
|
|
+ bw_second = router_get_advertised_bandwidth(second);
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ if (bw_first > bw_second)
|
|
|
+ return -1;
|
|
|
+ else if (bw_first < bw_second)
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
- else
|
|
|
- return 0;
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+ /* They're equal! Compare by identity digest, so there's a
|
|
|
+ * deterministic order and we avoid flapping. */
|
|
|
+ return _compare_routerinfo_by_id_digest(a, b);
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
/** DOCDOC takes list of routerinfo */
|