From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net/null:Different mac address support
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 11:40:23 +0000
Message-ID: <6c6d62cd-0b30-c68a-8036-ebe621f996bc@intel.com>
References: <1517623898-53443-1-git-send-email-malleshx.koujalagi@intel.com>
 <1520307314-25049-1-git-send-email-malleshx.koujalagi@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mtetsuyah@gmail.com
To: Mallesh Koujalagi <malleshx.koujalagi@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1986C4F9A
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  6 Mar 2018 12:40:25 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <1520307314-25049-1-git-send-email-malleshx.koujalagi@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 3/6/2018 3:35 AM, Mallesh Koujalagi wrote:
> After attaching two Null device to ovs, seeing "00.00.00.00.00.00" mac
> address for both null devices. Fix this issue, by setting different mac
> address.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mallesh Koujalagi <malleshx.koujalagi@intel.com>

<...>

> @@ -514,12 +524,21 @@ eth_dev_null_create(struct rte_vdev_device *dev,
>  	if (!data)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> +	eth_addr = rte_zmalloc_socket(rte_vdev_device_name(dev),
> +			sizeof(*eth_addr), 0, dev->device.numa_node);
> +	if (eth_addr == NULL) {
> +		rte_free(data);
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +	}
> +
>  	eth_dev = rte_eth_vdev_allocate(dev, sizeof(*internals));
>  	if (!eth_dev) {
> +		rte_free(eth_addr);
>  		rte_free(data);
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  	}

Same comment from previous version, why not put "eth_addr" inside "struct
pmd_internals"?

"struct pmd_internals" is already allocated/freed in the code, so you don't need
to manage "eth_addr" if you put it into "struct pmd_internals" it will come free.

<...>