Attention is currently required from: laforge, daniel, lynxis lazus.
9 comments:
Commit Message:
Patch Set #7, Line 11: This violates the spec
spec reference please?
let's also mention where exactly:
HLR User manual 13.7.3 PDP Info / Access Point Name
right?
Patch Set #7, Line 17: premium
premium?
Patchset:
It would be really cool to see all new VTY commands tested in the *.vty transcript test, because that would also be a lot easier to understand and review than just reading the vty.c code.
File include/osmocom/hlr/hlr_ps.h:
#pragma once
(extra blank line)
(extra blank line)
File src/gsup_server.c:
Patch Set #7, Line 480: if (g_hlr->ps.pdp_profile.enabled) {
maybe include these checks somehow?
if (g_hlr->ps.pdp_profile.num_pdp_info)
OSMO_ASSERT(g_hlr->ps.pdp_profile.num_pdp_infos <= ARRAY_SIZE(g_hlr->ps.pdp_profile.pdp_infos));
Could 'pdp_profile.enabled' be dropped because num_pdp_info == 0 means the same?
File src/hlr_vty.c:
Define a PDP profile set.\n"
"Unique identifier for this PDP profile set.\n")
I think the confusion is that there's only a pdp-profiles "default", but the help for default states […]
In the future, this may look like this:
DEFUN(cfg_ps_pdp_profiles,
cfg_ps_pdp_profiles_cmd,
"pdp-profiles (default|NAME)",
"Define a PDP profile set.\n"
"Define the global default profile.\n"
"Define a custom profile with this unique identifier.\n")
does that make sense? if yes, i would do this now:
DEFUN(cfg_ps_pdp_profiles,
cfg_ps_pdp_profiles_cmd,
"pdp-profiles default",
"Define a PDP profile set.\n"
"Define the global default profile.\n")
File tests/test_nodes.vty:
please also add tests for the command doc strings, to verify all new docs, like
# ps?
# ps
(ps)# list
(ps)# pdp-profiles ?
etc
and also add tests for write-back like
# show running-config
...
hlr
...
ps
pdp-profiles default
...
To view, visit change 32512. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.