Yes, I send the command
l1ctl_tx_fbsb_req(ms, ms->test_arfcn,
L1CTL_FBSB_F_FB0 | L1CTL_FBSB_F_SB, 100, 0,
app_state.ccch_mode, dbm2rxlev(-85));
before switching channels.
Now most of the channels stick on for much longer, but a few drop within
seconds.
But I cannot know for sure if this has "worked" until I can decode and
recognise some FACCH commands.
On AMR HR I get data like:
TCH/H (hl=0, hu=0) in FN=1864368 DL SACCH
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=0) in FN=1864369 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=0) in FN=1864371 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864373 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864375 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864386 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864388 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864390 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864392 DL
TCH/H (hl=0, hu=0) in FN=1864394 DL SACCH
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864395 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864397 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864399 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=0) in FN=1864401 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864403 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=0) in FN=1864405 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=1) in FN=1864408 DL
Detected FACCH (hl=1, hu=0) in FN=1864410 DL
TCH/H (hl=0, hu=0) in FN=1864420 DL SACCH
which does not look correct because I think the FACCH should be in groups
of 4.
Any explanations? Suggestions?
B.
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Pe <oxccoxcc(a)yandex.ru> wrote:
Hi, Bhaskar11
Did you resolve problem with low snr?
Do you make synchronization on SCH before going to TCH, after Assignment
Command?
--
View this message in context:
http://baseband-devel.722152.n3.nabble.com/Structure-of-traffic-data-in-bur…
Sent from the baseband-devel mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.