Attention is currently required from: arehbein, neels, fixeria.

Patch set 18:Code-Review -1

View Change

6 comments:

• File src/osmo-bsc/bts.c:

  • Patch Set #18, Line 535: if (!gsm_bts_check_ny1(bts, LOGL_ERROR)) return -EINVAL;

    put return always in a separate line.

  • Patch Set #18, Line 1726: const struct gsm_lchan *gl = gsm_bts_get_cbch(bts);

    I'm still not understanding why are you taking a CBCH channel here, seems totally not related.
    Furthermore, it should be called "lchan".

  • Patch Set #18, Line 1729: if (gl) {

    no need for {} here. Linter should already have warned about it.

  • Patch Set #18, Line 1730: T3124 = (gl->type == GSM_LCHAN_SDCCH) ? GSM_T3124_SDCCH : GSM_T3124_OTHER_CH;

    this is always going to be false since gl is CBCH.

  • Patch Set #18, Line 1732: /* Take the higher lower bound to be safe */

    you can then move the comment to the "else" line (1731)

• File src/osmo-bsc/bts_ipaccess_nanobts_omlattr.c:

  • Patch Set #18, Line 95: gsm_bts_check_ny1(bts, LOGL_NOTICE);

    I really see no reason for having different log levels.

To view, visit change 30602. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.