Hi Harald,
Sorry for long delay in reply.
On 05-Feb-22 17:34, Harald Welte wrote:
Hi Marcin, Wojciech,
thanks for the revised patch. In general it looks fine to me.
Do you have a public git tree with your patchset applied? I'm asking as we do have automatic testing in place at https://jenkins.osmocom.org/ where I just need to specify a remote git repo andit will build this kernel and run the test suite.
I've created a public fork with our patchset applied, please see [1].
Some minor remarks below, all not critical, just some thoughts.
It might make sense to mention in the commit log that this patch by itself would create GTP-U without GTP ECHO capabilities, and that a subsequent patch will address this.
This patch allows to create GTP device without providing IFLA_GTP_FD0 and IFLA_GTP_FD1 arguments. If the user does not provide file handles to the sockets, then GTP module takes care of creating UDP sockets by itself.
I'm wondering if we should make this more explicit, i.e. rather than implicitly creating the kernel socket automagically, make this mode explicit upon request by some netlink attribute.
Sockets are created with the commonly known UDP ports used for GTP protocol (GTP0_PORT and GTP1U_PORT).
I'm wondering if there are use cases that need to operate on non-standard ports. The current module can be used that way (as the socket is created in user space). If the "kernel socket mode" was requested explicitly via netlink attribute, one could just as well pass along the port number[s] this way.