Attention is currently required from: fixeria.
pespin has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28837 )
Change subject: tests/ranap_rab_ass: fix NULL pointer dereference
......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
File tests/ranap_rab_ass/ranap_rab_ass_test.c:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28837/comment/e8084232_882b8db9
PS1, Line 67: if (encoded != NULL) {
I'm a bit lost here. Is this really returning encoded=NULL at all? the commit message seems to be indicating so, but I doubt it.
If at all, it should be "Fix potential null pointer dereference".
In any case, I think adding an OSMO_ASSERT(encoded) would be preferable here.
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28837
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: osmo-hnbgw
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I16fea7b2a8cb1d693e01c91d7633550e2e599ceb
Gerrit-Change-Number: 28837
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-CC: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 12:28:57 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: neels, pespin.
laforge has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28816 )
Change subject: add ps_rab_ass FSM to map GTP via UPF
......................................................................
Patch Set 3:
(1 comment)
File include/osmocom/hnbgw/hnbgw.h:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28816/comment/68ef4966_d3888780
PS2, Line 193: /* Return true when the user configured GTP mapping to be enabled, by configuring a PFCP link to a UPF.
> "Firstly to allow users to keep their current installations working": you mean non-working right? As […]
If a current setup without GTP-U proxy in SGSN (or HNBGW) is broken, then I think there is an unrelated bug that should be fixed. see https://projects.sysmocom.de/issues/5435#note-16
I really don't think we should *enforce* the use of a GTP-U proxy / upf. The only real reason to use it is in situations where thre is no transparent routing of IP packets between RAN and CN - which is basically the case in probably almost every larger-scale commercial network out there. Just in lab / private networks this is an option.
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/28816
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: osmo-hnbgw
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ic9bc30f322c4c6c6e82462d1da50cb15b336c63a
Gerrit-Change-Number: 28816
Gerrit-PatchSet: 3
Gerrit-Owner: neels <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-Reviewer: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-CC: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org>
Gerrit-Attention: neels <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 11:48:00 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: neels <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org>
Comment-In-Reply-To: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: pespin.
laforge has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-cbc/+/28828 )
Change subject: Split smscb_peer_fsm into CBSP and SBcAP specific FSMs
......................................................................
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+1
(1 comment)
File src/cbsp_smscb_peer_fsm.c:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-cbc/+/28828/comment/f07ac078_46817312
PS1, Line 3: mme
if this is CBSP then there's no MME
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-cbc/+/28828
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: osmo-cbc
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I0fd00b60cdc6bc6a088be1336d849548ca89c847
Gerrit-Change-Number: 28828
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-Reviewer: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: osmith <osmith(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 11:26:16 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: Yes
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: pespin.
laforge has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-cbc/+/28826 )
Change subject: Split event list for smscb_message_fsm and smscb_peer_fsm
......................................................................
Patch Set 2: Code-Review+1
(1 comment)
Patchset:
PS2:
I'd say it's again one of those decisions where I don't really see a clear advantage of either-or. I find it much more reasonable with shared event names, hence that's what I originally implemented it. But well, since you're doing all the related development work now.
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-cbc/+/28826
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: osmo-cbc
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I909474d1ff4ec7ed20aff0981da47074397df6cb
Gerrit-Change-Number: 28826
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-Reviewer: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: osmith <osmith(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 11:24:02 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: Yes
Gerrit-MessageType: comment