From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Smart Subject: Re: [RFC] FC Transport : Async Events via netlink interface Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:52:40 -0400 Message-ID: <44463298.7060008@emulex.com> References: <1145306661.4151.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060418160121.GA2707@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: James.Smart@Emulex.Com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from emulex.emulex.com ([138.239.112.1]:50369 "EHLO emulex.emulex.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750739AbWDSMwu (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:52:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060418160121.GA2707@us.ibm.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mike Anderson Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Mike Anderson wrote: > Is there some reason that you are not using nlmsg_multicast. The caller of > this function is somewhat simulating the function of multicast. Only that I haven't looked into using groups yet. It certainly makes sense. > In the send_fail case it looks like you leak skbs. Do you need to add a > call to nlmsg_free or kfree_skb? Yep. I'll include these comments in the revised post. I'll wait a little longer for any further comments. -- james