enum egprs_puncturing_values

Jacob jacob01 at gmx.net
Thu Dec 15 13:36:23 UTC 2016


Hi Neels,

AFAICS you are mixing up "puncturing scheme" and "Coding and Puncturing
Scheme", there are still only three puncturing schemes, where up to 3 of
them may be used with a certain MCS. The P scheme has to be changed
(incremented IIRC) after each use.

Nevertheless choosing a safe value for INVALID is probably not bad if
there might be another P in some future spec. But I'd be careful with
negative values in enums.

(I didn't check that against the current version of the code, so I might
be completely out of sync).

HTH Jacob

On 12/15/2016 12:45 PM, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
> Today I looked at enum egprs_puncturing_values by coincidence:
> 
>   /*
>    * Valid puncturing scheme values
>    * TS 44.060 10.4.8a.3.1, 10.4.8a.2.1, 10.4.8a.1.1
>    */
>   enum egprs_puncturing_values {
>           EGPRS_PS_1,
>           EGPRS_PS_2,
>           EGPRS_PS_3,
>           EGPRS_PS_INVALID,
>   };
> 
...
> 
> I would prefer EGPRS_PS_INVALID=-1 (i.e. outside the spec's value range) and
> the other enum values named appropriately, like EGPRS_MSC4_P1, so that our enum
> actually reflects the spec as advertised. Is there something I'm missing?
> 
> These enum values were added in:
>   commit 7a05b039c835868eff34308d861edfeb28d1763b
>   Author: Aravind Sirsikar <arvind.sirsikar at radisys.com>
>   Date:   Wed Mar 23 18:29:45 2016 +0530
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ~N
> 


More information about the osmocom-net-gprs mailing list