Attention is currently required from: laforge, pespin.
2 comments:
Commit Message:
Current osmo-bts-trx includes a provision for invoking ECUs from
libosmocodec in the UL path from the channel decoder to the RTP
output; no other models currently do likewise, but there is no
particular reason why this ECU invokation couldn't be moved into
model-independent code.
Some background knowledge: AFAIR, osmo-bts-sysmo (and hence liekly its relatives
oc2g + lc15) already do some ECU magic in the DSP.
At least in the case of FR1 and EFR codecs, I am very certain that sysmoBTS DSP does NOT apply any kind of ECU on UL, at least not in the GSM 06.11/06.61 sense of this term/concept. Any time there is a BFI condition on the uplink (i.e., the PHY heard radio noise rather than a traffic frame from the MS), the output from the PHY is a zero-length payload, and l1if_tch_rx() pushes this empty payload to l1sap, where we now do the option of "rtp continuous-streaming". An ECU in the GSM 06.11 sense (like the one implemented in libosmocodec) would be substituting a synthetic frame in this condition, which sysmoBTS PHY most certainly does NOT do. I am speaking with such certainty because ever since you graciously sold me that discounted sysmoBTS almost a year ago, I've been working with nothing but FR1 and EFR voice calls, I've been looking at its RTP output from day 1, and I recently started sniffing TCH DL on the MS to see what the PHY puts out in that direction too...
Then some user discovered that audio sounded worse on -trx than on -sysmo,
It is entirely possible (and quite likely) that the trx version still has various defects and shortcomings in need of fixing - and because I am very interested in CSD which won't happen in the sysmo version, I would like to acquire some suitable hw for osmo-bts-trx and start improving FR/EFR voice in that version too. Distant plans...
and they implemented the "provision for invoking ECUs" in -trx [only].
Two new problems with this attempt at solving the original perceived problem:
The ECU-in-the-wrong-place problem is the main reason why the present patch will remain necessary even after I submit my improved FR codec ECU to libosmocodec and get it merged (hopefully).
Patchset:
I think rather than specifying that an ECU happens somewhere "downstream" I think it's more logical […]
I actually came to the same conclusion myself. Out of your proposed names, I like "rtp internal-uplink-ecu" the most. Emphasizing that it is for UL is important - see my other comment about the current ECU invokation being in the wrong place, and the possibility of doing a more proper (per TS 28.062 section C.3.2.1.1) downlink ECU application at some future point.
To view, visit change 32110. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.