Attention is currently required from: pespin, daniel.

Patch set 10:Code-Review -1

View Change

15 comments:

• File src/core/osmo_io_uring.c:

  • Patch Set #10, Line 118: return

    Looks like `msg` is leaked here. Why not just doing `OSMO_ASSERT(msghdr != NULL)` here and above?

  • Patch Set #10, Line 126: Could not get io_uring_sqe

    missing `\n`

  • Patch Set #10, Line 130: // Prep msgb/iov

    cosmetic: use the `/* ... */` syntax for comments

  • Patch Set #10, Line 135: // NOTE: This only works if we have one read per fd

    cosmetic: use the `/* ... */` syntax for comments

  • Patch Set #10, Line 153: return

    Again, looks like `msg` is leaked here.

  • Patch Set #10, Line 165: Could not get io_uring_sqe

    Again missing `\n`.

  • Patch Set #10, Line 275: /* Fallthrough */

    This comment is not really needed since there is no code preceding it.

  • Patch Set #10, Line 295: io_uring_peek_cqe

    Are you sure this is correct?
    This function is called in the conditional part of the loop, and then here again?

  • Patch Set #10, Line 326: Could not get io_uring_sqe

    missing '\n'

  • Patch Set #10, Line 360:

    if (!sqe)
    			OSMO_ASSERT(0);
    

    `OSMO_ASSERT(sqe != NULL)`

  • Patch Set #10, Line 362: (void *)0x0

    Why not `NULL`?

  • Patch Set #10, Line 369:

    if (!sqe)
    			OSMO_ASSERT(0);
    

    `OSMO_ASSERT(sqe != NULL)`

  • Patch Set #10, Line 397: return

    `msg` is leaked here.

  • Patch Set #10, Line 404: Could not get io_uring_sqe

    missing `\n`

  • Patch Set #10, Line 438:

    ws

To view, visit change 32536. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.