Attention is currently required from: pespin.
fixeria has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-pcu/+/32358 )
Change subject: ms: Make ms_{attach,detach}_tbf expectancies more robust ......................................................................
Patch Set 3:
(2 comments)
File src/gprs_ms.c:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-pcu/+/32358/comment/5d534d4c_59b4232f PS2, Line 355: OSMO_ASSERT(ms);
it's not really the same. […]
Not that I wanted to block you here... But looking at the function signature, I would never assume that any of the pointer arguments are optional and can legally/intentionally be NULL here. I wish there was some kind of notation in C to express that some pointer can/shall never be NULL (or vice versa).
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-pcu/+/32358/comment/391932ff_d6f6550a PS2, Line 419: OSMO_ASSERT(tbf_ms(tbf) == ms);
I can add an OSMO_ASSERT(tbf) there if you want, but it's clear here that it is expected to be not N […]
No no no, no more asserts please.