Attention is currently required from: fixeria, neels.

View Change

3 comments:

• File src/osmo-upf/up_endpoint.c:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 176: OSMO_ASSERT(f_seid)

    missing semicolon?

    Done

  • Patch Set #1, Line 217: nack_response

    I would go for a separate function (e.g. `up_ep_tx_nack()`) to avoid code duplication.

    I think it's fine having it this, way it's only 3 lines of code and it's common practice to handle nack this way imho.

    It would make sense if a lot of code was needed, but it's not really the case.

• File src/osmo-upf/up_session.c:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 115: return NULL;

    This code is unreachable. […]

    I also thought about it, and tbh I only added this return to avoid warnings on older compilers/static analysis tools. I prefer keeping the assert in each branch, specially the first one, since it becomes clearer that the break is not something which may not been done on purpose.

    I'll add a comment here /* unreachable */, since adding more code like ASSERT could also trigger a warning by static analysis tools

To view, visit change 41482. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.