Attention is currently required from: dexter, falconia, fixeria.
pespin has posted comments on this change by falconia. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bts/+/41047?usp=email )
Change subject: TCH UL path: add out-of-band BFI flag ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(3 comments)
File include/osmo-bts/msg_utils.h:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bts/+/41047/comment/e50ff293_01f8f716?usp=... : PS1, Line 27: /* Accessor macros for control buffer words in RTP input path */ Can you add a a bit more framing to clearly separate the 2 groups of cb fields?
eg:
/**************************************************************** * Accessor macros for control buffer words in RTP input path (DL) *****************************************************************/
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bts/+/41047/comment/58b8fd84_39ba8749?usp=... : PS1, Line 39: #define tch_ul_msg_bfi(x) ((x)->cb[0]) I wonder whether this is a boolean, a flag, or an integer.
File src/common/l1sap.c:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bts/+/41047/comment/1fe57ebe_1de536f3?usp=... : PS1, Line 2229: teh = 0xE0 | (tch_ul_msg_bfi(msg) << 1); and this kind of operation together with "I wonder whether this is a boolean, a flag, or an integer." comment makes it even more disturbing ;)
EDIT: Ok, I see from below ("= true") that this is a boolean. Hence, I'd prefer to keep the assigning logic here as it was before, instead of shifting a boolean.