From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Remy Horton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kcp: add kernel control path kernel module Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 09:49:49 +0000 Message-ID: <56A9E43D.5000105@intel.com> References: <1453911849-16562-1-git-send-email-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <1453911849-16562-2-git-send-email-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: Ferruh Yigit Return-path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0839C3A4 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 10:50:13 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <1453911849-16562-2-git-send-email-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Comments inline ..Remy On 27/01/2016 16:24, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > This kernel module is based on KNI module, but this one is stripped > version of it and only for control messages, no data transfer > functionality provided. > > This Linux kernel module helps userspace application create virtual > interfaces and when a control command issued into that virtual > interface, module pushes the command to the userspace and gets the > response back for the caller application. > > Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit > --- > + net_dev = alloc_netdev(sizeof(struct kcp_dev), name, > +#ifdef NET_NAME_UNKNOWN > + NET_NAME_UNKNOWN, > +#endif > + kcp_net_init); Something doesn't feel quite right here. In cases where NET_NAME_UNKNOWN is undefined, is the signature for alloc_netdev different? > +MODULE_LICENSE("Dual BSD/GPL"); > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Intel Corporation"); > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Kernel Module for managing kcp devices"); I'm not up to speed on this area, but some of the file headers only mention GPL/LGPL. This correct? > + nlmsg_unicast(nl_sock, skb, pid); > + KCP_DBG("Sent cmd:%d port:%d\n", cmd_id, port_id); > + > + /*nlmsg_free(skb);*/ > + > + return 0; > +} Oops.. :) Possible memory leak, or is *skb statically allocated?